quantitative research questions about gender male and female

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Surveys

Gender Survey Questions For Questionnaires

Understanding different genders’ unique viewpoints and experiences is critical for businesses, researchers, and organizations in the modern age. When conducting surveys or questionnaires, it is critical to include gender survey questions that are respectful, inclusive, and yield meaningful insights. 

In this blog, we will discuss the significance of gender questionnaires and give you a strategy for creating inclusive and effective gender questionnaires.

Content Index

What is the gender survey question?

Importance of gender survey questions in a questionnaire, why is there a need for more than two gender options in a questionnaire, transgender is an important category now, best practices for asking gender questions in a questionnaire.

Gender survey questions are a questionnaire that is asked of a participant to understand what is the gender of the respondent. 

Analysis of the survey responses and considering gender as a parameter will enable a researcher to evaluate how gender plays a role in the participant’s choices and help him deduce a pattern. 

Gender questionnaire questions are used in various types of research, such as business, social science research, etc. A survey question is one of the various types of survey questions that are most commonly asked in surveys.

Previously, only male and female options used to appear in such questions. However, with so many policies coming into place and with people accepting their genders freely, there are many more options. Gender questionnaire questions are sensitive. However, these can enable the researcher to analyze their data more accurately in their questionnaires .

With the growing importance of gender equality, it is important to phrase these questions in such a way that they do not offend any participants and provide a sense of inclusiveness to all gender categories.

A good survey design means it will accomplish two things: accuracy and inclusiveness. A questionnaire has to be designed so that it can collect accurate data using the best practices for survey designs and be inclusive at the same time. 

The questionnaire’s objective should be to make the participant feel that their opinion matters and will be valued as much as any other participant, without any biases.

LEARN ABOUT: Conformity Bias

The old method, where the gender questionnaire provided only two options, namely male and female, suggests that everyone falls under only these two categories, which is against the two things mentioned above. 

It suggests discrimination against transgender and non-conforming respondents, and many times the results achieved will not be accurate as there was no option given to the respondent. However, using a five-category question or a multi-step approach for gender data allows the participant to choose from various categories and also has the freedom to write an open-ended response. 

Such an option provides the researcher with much more accurate data and makes the respondent feel valued and respected. Furthermore, it will also increase the response rate for the questionnaire because the participant does not feel he is forced to answer certain questions, especially if they are private.

While conducting a survey, it doesn’t hurt to know your survey respondents a little more, like their age, sex, gender, etc. Questions based on gender have a precious impact on the results. It will enable you to derive results and study behavioral patterns according to gender and to make wise decisions for the purpose you are conducting your research. 

Asking gender questions enables you to ensure that your sample is representative or to study the gender effects on your research. Thus, using the age-old methods of asking gender questions of two options, if not altered, will keep giving you statistical data, which is not accurate, skipping important variations of responses based on gender and limiting understanding of the research .

Today’s social science research , public issues regarding gender discrimination, the rising consciousness of gender equality, and the movements around the world elucidate that giving two options or categorizing humans into two categories is outdated and ethically wrong.

Furthermore, considering the purpose of the survey, the analyses can be much more accurate if the demographic questions can be segmented into more than two categories.

For example, A cosmetic brand wants to survey to gather feedback about one of their products to help them market their product appropriately, depending on the audience. The feedback from a male will be different than that of a female. 

Furthermore, other categories, such as transgender, will also have a different opinion about the product and are also a considerable target audience for the cosmetic brand. 

Hence, a survey including gender questions having multiple choice options will give the company much more accurate data and make it easier to segment its audience and carry out appropriate marketing strategies based on the gender of the participants.

Start creating your own online surveys!

Our online software is trusted by some of the biggest brands in the world, and we have a FREE plan. Sign up now. See plans & features.

In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of transgenders, and they accommodate a significant portion of the population now. 

According to a 2016 study conducted in the United States, it was observed that 0.6% of all adults, or about 1.4 million people identify as transgender. So, on average, it is wise to expect that if a survey is sent to 500 participants, there will be at least 3 transgenders among them. Also, some states in the US have a higher density of transgender than 0.6%.

Furthermore, it has also been proven that transgender is not a trait you get once you are an adult, but it is a deeply held identity right from childhood. Hence, addressing transgender in gender questionnaire is vital to get accurate demographic information without offending the participants and also showcases non-discrimination.

Furthermore, multiple gender categories are evolving; hence, we can see many survey designers trying to implement these in their surveys. With so many options, it has become difficult for survey researchers to understand the need to collect valuable demographic data and balance it with appropriate gender choices. 

Although, while wording the question, a researcher has to ensure not to offend the participant and be respectful.

Following is an example of the number of choices that can be given in a gender choice question:

• Young woman
• Agender (no gender identity)
• Androgynous (not one specific sex)
• Gender fluid (different genders at different times)
• Bigender (two gender identities)
• Demi girl (partly girl)
• Demiboy (partly boy)
• Non-binary (not male or female)
• Genderqueer (non-traditional gender distinction)
• Trigender (shifts in three genders)
• Intersex (physical, hormonal, or genetic features of male
• Rather not say
• Other (please specify)

Considering the long list of genders accepted in today’s world, it is difficult to understand which have to be included and which are not. 

Although inclusivity of all options is vital, certainly, you cannot use the entire list, as surveys cannot be monotonous or exhaustive and should not take much time for the participant.

Moreover, you have a legal obligation to collect only the needed information. 

With data collection compliances (GDPR) coming into place, there will be tighter regulations to handle sensitive personal information. To understand when, how, and why to use a gender question for a questionnaire, you need to ask the following questions to yourself before designing a survey .

• Is there a need to ask the question at all?
• Should I ask about orientation and gender identity?
• How do I word my question?
• Does asking the question provide any business value?

One major confusion many people face is understanding the distinction between sex, sexual orientation, and gender. A researcher has to make sure the three questions are addressed separately. The distinction between these three points is as follows:

This refers to the anatomical characteristic of a person. When asking these questions, you should use options such as Male, Female, and Intersex.

Gender identity refers to what the person feels he is in a psychological sense, regardless of what sex a person was assigned at birth. 

Sexual orientation questions

This refers to emotional, physical, and sexual attraction to other people and does not fall under the gender question category but is affiliated with it. Words like gay/lesbian, bisexual/pansexual, and heterosexual can be used to discuss sexual preference. Please note it is advised not to use homosexual as it is frowned upon by most people.

There are many ways a gender identity question can be worded to suit specific needs. A couple of approaches can be used to ask current gender identity questions in a survey.

1st approach

If you find there is a need to ask a gender question, the following can be used.

• Others (Please specify)
• Other (Please specify)
• Not applicable

Using this approach enables a researcher to include transgender categories and also gives enough importance to mention any other gender identity. 

Moreover, using a multi-step approach is much faster to complete for a participant than using a single-step approach. Furthermore, adding ‘rather not say’ gives the participant a feeling that this is voluntary and not a forced question, which can give a good response rate for the survey.

2nd approach

If needed, an open-ended question can be asked.

• Gender?_____________

You may need to conduct text analysis for such a question; however, it is all-inclusive and will allow the participant to choose their own identity.

Apart from the decision to choose the approach, there are a few points that a researcher should not forget while using gender questions in a questionnaire. The following points will help you create a good survey design .

• Make sure you can justify why you are asking the question.
• Take into account the privacy and comfort of your participant over anything else.
• Maintain data security.
• Maintain anonymity of personal data.
• Try and include open-ended questions to give enough freedom to explain who they are.
• All gender questions are optional.

Understanding and recognizing our varied cultures requires gender-related questions in questionnaires. We can better understand gender identity-related issues by conducting inclusive and comprehensive questionnaires. Remember to offer options for different identities and respect respondents’ wishes to withhold information. 

QuestionPro is a popular online survey platform offering various features and tools for designing and delivering surveys, including the ability to add gender survey questionnaires. You may use QuestionPro to create surveys that target gender-related themes and collect vital data. Let’s work toward a world where gender identity is celebrated and accepted.

LEARN MORE         SIGN UP FREE

Frequently Asking Questions

Woman, man, transgender, and non-binary are gender-category responses. Chromosomes, hormones, and secondary traits define sex. Male, female, and intersex are typical sex response options.

 Gender questions in surveys may reveal gender tendencies. The survey is affected by these gender-related questions. Gender-specific surveys are sometimes done.

MORE LIKE THIS

Top 15 Employee Retention Software in 2024

Apr 4, 2024

Top 10 Employee Development Software for Talent Growth

Apr 3, 2024

Top 5 Insight Community Platforms to Elevate Your Research

Choose The Right Concept Testing Platform to Boost Your Ideas

Apr 2, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

A behind-the-scenes blog about research methods at Pew Research Center.

For our latest research findings, visit  pewresearch.org .

Adapting how we ask about the gender of our survey respondents

Knowing the gender of our survey respondents is critical to a variety of analyses we do at Pew Research Center. Gender affects how a person sees and is seen by the world. It’s predictive of things like  voting behavior ,  the wage gap  and  household responsibilities .

On nearly all surveys we conduct in the United States, we ask people, “Are you male or female?” (Or, in Spanish:  ¿Es usted hombre o mujer? ) While this wording has been the standard question we’ve used for years, we wondered if we could find a new way to ask about gender that would acknowledge changing norms around gender identity and improve data quality and accuracy, while still maintaining the neutrality that defines the Center.

We organized a research team to answer this question and — if the answer turned out to be yes — determine how we might modify the way we ask about respondents’ gender. Ultimately, we settled on a new version of the question: “Do you describe yourself as a man, a woman, or in some other way?” (Or, in Spanish:  ¿Se describe a sí mismo(a) como un hombre, una mujer o de alguna otra manera? )

Here, we detail how and why we came to this decision.

We considered attitudes, laws and best practices in research

Gender is a  social construct  based on how people see themselves and how others see them. Sex, by contrast, is a biological construct assigned at birth. An estimated  1.4 million U.S. adults  are transgender, which is defined in this post as people who identify as  neither a man nor a woman  (sometimes people in this group use the term “nonbinary”) or those who identify with a gender different from the  sex they were assigned at birth . (It is worth noting that some people in this group might use terms other than “transgender” to describe themselves.) Roughly  one-in-five U.S. adults  know someone who uses a gender neutral pronoun such as “they” instead of “he” or “she,” and  17 states and the District of Columbia  have adapted to this evolution in gender identity by adding a nonbinary option to driver’s licenses.

Other survey researchers have also begun adapting their gender questions.  Some   surveys  ask a two-step question to determine both sex assigned at birth and current gender identity.  Others   ask  whether a respondent is male or female and whether they self-identify as transgender. Meanwhile,  qualitative research  has looked at the best terms to use when asking about gender identity.

Given that many Americans view gender in a way that is more complex than can be captured in just the two response options of “male” and “female,” adding a third option could improve data accuracy by ensuring the data are representative and inclusive of all types of voices. Proponents of a third gender response option may also perceive the lack of such an option as exclusionary. On the other hand, the Center was concerned that adding a third option could possibly alienate the  56% of U.S. adults  who said in a 2018 survey that forms or online profiles should  not  include an option other than “man” and “woman.” If either group stopped participating in our surveys, it would introduce bias and harm data quality. Another consideration was how a third gender response option would translate into Spanish. The Center’s surveys are almost always conducted in both English and Spanish, and little existing research has addressed how to phrase a revised gender question in Spanish.

Prior research informed our new gender identity question

In  previous   studies , researchers have conducted a variety of tests about the best way to ask about gender. Informed by this research, we decided to make our starting point the question wording used in the  National Crime Victimization Survey : “Do you currently describe yourself as male, female or transgender?” We then made two changes based on previous research.

First, we replaced “transgender” with the phrase “in some other way.” Some people who identify as neither male nor female  do not identify  with the term “transgender,” instead preferring “nonbinary,” “genderfluid” or other terms. “Transgender” also isn’t necessarily mutually exclusive from “male” and “female.” For example, some people consider themselves both male and transgender. In addition, there is no Spanish equivalent of “transgender,” and around  three-in-ten  U.S. adults do not have a clear understanding of what “transgender” means.

Second, we replaced “male” and “female” with “a man” and “a woman.” The words “male” and “female” refer to a  person’s biology or sex , while the words “man” and “woman” are cultural terms that are more consistent with the concept of gender.

We conducted an experiment to address outstanding concerns

In June and July 2020, we conducted an online  opt-in  survey of 5,903 internet panelists to test two alternative gender question options in English and Spanish. A total of 4,931 responded in English and 972 responded in Spanish. The survey took an average of 12 minutes to complete and included questions about the coronavirus outbreak, political approval and other demographics.

Respondents were randomly assigned to receive one of three sets of gender questions after receiving other demographic questions. One group of respondents (n=1,654) received the standard Pew Research Center question. Another group (n=2,611) received a question about sex, followed by a question about gender:

1. “Were you born male or female?” ( ¿Su sexo al nacer fue masculino o femenino? )

2. “Do you describe yourself as a man, a woman, or in some other way?” ( ¿Se describe a sí mismo(a) como un hombre, una mujer o de alguna otra manera? ) The phrase “some other way” also included a text box for respondent specification.

In asking these questions, it was especially important that we minimized the number of adults who might incorrectly be classified as transgender. Since the U.S. transgender population is small, estimates of the size of this population might be  artificially inflated  even if a small number of respondents accidentally chose the wrong answer. To minimize this error, we asked a third follow-up question of those whose responses to these two questions did not match:

3. “Just to confirm, you were born [male/female] and now describe yourself [as a man/as a woman/in some other way]. Is that correct?” ( Solo para confirmar, su sexo al nacer fue [masculino/femenino] y ahora se describe a sí mismo(a) [como hombre/como mujer/de otra manera]. ¿Es eso correcto? )

If respondents said their answers were not recorded correctly, they were given the opportunity to re-answer both questions.

A final group (n=1,638) received the same questions as the second group, but in reverse order; they received the question about gender identity before the question about sex assigned at birth. This group was also asked to confirm if their answers to the two questions didn’t match.

At the end of the survey, immediately following the gender/sex questions, we asked all respondents whether they thought our questions were biased (and, if so, why), followed by two questions about their views on transgender rights and offering a third gender option on forms and online profiles.

Unweighted estimates from this experiment are sprinkled throughout the remainder of this post. While opt-in samples are not ideal for creating point estimates, they are useful when comparing experimental wording conditions, as was the purpose here. To further improve comparability and to ensure we had reliable estimates, we also implemented a series of quotas and included an oversample of less-acculturated Hispanics (as determined by a combination of language skills, years living in the U.S., type of media consumption and self-described cultural affiliation).

Data quality improved with the new gender question

Regardless of the way in which we asked respondents their sex/gender, we observed consistent distributions among men and women, suggesting little effect of the question wording for most people. However, among English-speaking adults who received the new gender questions, 1.5% selected the third, nonbinary response option or chose a gender inconsistent with their sex, suggesting that the inclusion of the third option had the intended effect on being more inclusive and improving data accuracy.

There was some concern that people who consider themselves a man or woman may not wish to be defined by their gender and instead opt for the third option and write in a non-gender term to describe themselves, such as “human” or “mother” or “scientist.” A large number of these types of responses would have suggested that the revised question would introduce error and hurt data quality. Luckily, we only observed four of these types of responses among English speakers, affecting the estimate by 0.1 percentage point and suggesting that it was not a problem.

Providing a third gender option didn’t alienate people

Fewer English-speaking respondents to our 2020 survey said they opposed the inclusion of a third gender response option on forms or online profiles (44%) than in our 2018 survey. However, 44% is still a substantial share of respondents. We were concerned that opponents would find our new, more inclusive question off-putting. This concern did not appear in the data. Fewer than 1% opted not to answer the gender question.

The revised gender question also didn’t cause more people to stop taking the survey before completing it. No more than 0.5% of English-speaking respondents across all experimental conditions opted to stop participating at or after the sex and gender questions.

The revised questions also did not appear to be affecting the Center’s credibility as a nonpartisan research organization. When asked whether respondents thought the survey was politically neutral, about three-in-four English speakers said the survey was not at all or not very biased, regardless of which gender questions they received.

The new gender question worked in Spanish, too

A small proportion of Spanish-speaking respondents (3.6%) opted for the third gender choice or chose a gender inconsistent with their sex. While this was significantly higher than the estimate among English speakers (1.5%), both English and Spanish speakers were asked to confirm their choice if sex and gender responses did not match. Spanish speakers consistently confirmed their answers to both sex and gender. Moreover, when asked if they found any questions confusing, only six Spanish speakers mentioned the gender question wording, and none of the six were coded as transgender.

Similar to English-speaking respondents, Spanish speakers did not seem to be affected by the various question wordings. And the addition of a third option had no perceivable alienation effect. Some 40% of Spanish speakers said they disapproved of the addition of a third gender choice on forms, but the addition of a third response category to the gender question did not cause more people to stop participating in the survey prematurely, nor did it affect the proportion of Spanish-speakers who perceived the survey as somewhat or very biased.

Asking about sex in addition to gender wasn’t necessary

While our experiment used a two-step question to deduce both a respondent’s sex and gender, moving forward, we will limit most of the Center’s U.S. surveys to the single gender question referenced at the top of this post.

Based on comments collected at the end of our experiment, fewer than 1% of respondents mentioned the sex and gender questions in any way. Among those who did, 30% expressed frustration over the presence of multiple questions or concern about the use of the term “born” in the question on sex. Also, the inclusion of a question about respondent’s sex isn’t necessary for most of the Center’s research, which focuses predominantly on gender. And while we do construct weights based on population estimates by sex, the correlation between gender and sex suggests that gender can reliably be used as a proxy for sex for this purpose. Another important consideration is respondents’ time: If we don’t need to ask a question, we won’t.

In conclusion, this change in how we ask about gender was not taken lightly, as we were driven to ensure inclusivity and accuracy while maintaining the rigorousness and neutrality that characterizes the Center.

More from Decoded

Assessing the effects of generation using age-period-cohort analysis.

In this piece, we demonstrate how to conduct age-period-cohort analysis, a statistical tool, to determine the effects of generation.

How many Taiwanese live in the U.S.? It’s not an easy question to answer

Surveys can produce widely different estimates depending on how people are asked about their backgrounds.

Urban, suburban or rural? Americans’ perceptions of their own community type differ by party

Even when they live in similar areas, Democrats and Republicans differ over whether those areas are urban, suburban or rural.

The ‘class size paradox’: How individual- and group-level perspectives differ, and why it matters in research

The average class size at a university conveys little about the experience of the average student there.

Measuring community type in Europe, from big cities to country villages

How an outside measure of community type compares with Europeans’ own descriptions of where they live.

More From Decoded

To browse all of Pew Research Center findings and data by topic, visit pewresearch.org

About Decoded

Copyright 2022 Pew Research Center

Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation

Sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are key indicators of the demographic diversity in the United States. Sex and gender are often conflated under the assumptions that they are mutually determined and do not differ from each other; however, the growing visibility of transgender and intersex populations, as well as efforts to improve the measurement of sex and gender across many scientific fields, has demonstrated the need to reconsider how sex, gender, and the relationship between them are conceptualized. This is turn affects sexual orientation, because it is defined on the basis of the relationship between a person's own sex or gender and that of their actual or preferred partners. Sex, gender, and sexual orientation are core aspects of identity that shape opportunities, experiences with discrimination, and outcomes through the life course; therefore, it is crucial that measures of these concepts accurately capture their complexity.

Recognition of the diversity within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and other sexual and gender minorities - the LGBTQI+ population - has also led to a reexamination of how the concepts of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation are measured. Better measurement will improve the ability to identify sexual and gender minority populations and understand the challenges they face. LGBTQI+ people continue to experience disparate and inequitable treatment, including harassment, discrimination, and violence, which in turn affects outcomes in many areas of everyday life, including health and access to health care services, economic and educational attainment, and family and social support. Though knowledge of these disparities has increased significantly over the past decade, glaring gaps remain, often driven by a lack of reliable data.

Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation recommends that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) adopt new practices for collecting data on sex, gender, and sexual orientation - including collecting gender data by default, and not conflating gender with sex as a biological variable. The report recommends standardized language to be used in survey questions that ask about a respondent's sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Better measurements will improve data quality, as well as the NIH's ability to identify LGBTQI+ populations and understand the challenges they face.

Read Full Description

• Report Highlights
• Issue Brief: Measuring Sexual Orientation
• Issue Brief: Measuring Intersex Status or Differences in Sex Development
• Issue Brief: Measuring Gender Identity and Transgender Experience

Recent News

A Conversation with Brian Christian

In Remembrance of Daniel Kahneman

U.S. State Department Announces New Science Envoys

Coordinating Economic Data on U.S. Households

• Load More...

• Contributors
•  Links
•  Translations
• What is Gendered Innovations ?

Sex & Gender Analysis

• Research Priorities
• Rethinking Concepts
• Research Questions
• Analyzing Sex
• Analyzing Gender
• Sex and Gender Interact
• Intersectional Approaches
• Engineering Innovation
• Participatory Research
• Reference Models
• Language & Visualizations
• Tissues & Cells
• Lab Animal Research
• Sex in Biomedicine
• Gender in Health & Biomedicine
• Evolutionary Biology
• Machine Learning
• Social Robotics
• Hermaphroditic Species
• Impact Assessment
• Norm-Critical Innovation
• Intersectionality
• Race and Ethnicity
• Age and Sex in Drug Development
• Engineering
• Health & Medicine
• SABV in Biomedicine
• Tissues & Cells
• Urban Planning & Design

Case Studies

• Animal Research
• Animal Research 2
• Computer Science Curriculum
• Genetics of Sex Determination
• Chronic Pain
• Colorectal Cancer
• De-Gendering the Knee
• Dietary Assessment Method
• Heart Disease in Diverse Populations
• Medical Technology
• Nanomedicine
• Nanotechnology-Based Screening for HPV
• Nutrigenomics
• Osteoporosis Research in Men
• Prescription Drugs
• Systems Biology
• Assistive Technologies for the Elderly
• Domestic Robots
• Extended Virtual Reality
• Facial Recognition
• Gendering Social Robots
• Haptic Technology
• HIV Microbicides
• Inclusive Crash Test Dummies
• Human Thorax Model
• Machine Translation
• Making Machines Talk
• Video Games
• Virtual Assistants and Chatbots
• Agriculture
• Climate Change
• Environmental Chemicals
• Housing and Neighborhood Design
• Marine Science
• Menstrual Cups
• Population and Climate Change
• Quality Urban Spaces
• Smart Energy Solutions
• Smart Mobility
• Sustainable Fashion
• Waste Management
• Water Infrastructure
• Intersectional Design
• Major Granting Agencies
• Peer-Reviewed Journals
• Universities

Formulating Research Questions

Research questions typically flow from research priorities (see Rethinking Research Priorities and Outcomes ) and from the theories and concepts that frame research (see Rethinking Concepts and Theories ). Research priorities—along with concepts and theories—directly influence how research is designed. They function to 

• 1. delimit questions asked—and, by implication, questions not asked (see, for example, Case Study: Genetics of Sex Determination ).
• 2. frame the research design and choice of methods.

As with other stages of the research and development processes, the choice of a research question is often underpinned by assumptions—both implicit and explicit—about sex and gender (see Method: Analyzing Gender ). As in other stages of research and development, potential for creative innovation lies in critically examining existing practices in light of available evidence about sex and gender (Bührer et al., 2006; Schraudner et al., 2006; Schiebinger, 2008; Wylie, et al., Klinge, 2010; IOM, 2010; Wajcman, 2010).

Critical questions for analyzing the significance (if any) of sex and gender in formulating research questions:

1. What is the current state of knowledge of sex and gender ( norms , identities , or relations ) in a given area of research or development?

2. What do we not know as a result of not analyzing sex and gender?

3. How have sex and gender functioned to limit the research questions posed in this field? For example, coronary angiography is a powerful diagnostic tool for assessing coronary artery disease, but it can cause bleeding complications, especially in women. Researchers asked how angiography could be made safer and designed and patented new catheters and procedures to allow angiography from the radial artery rather than the groin. This shift reduces bleeding in everyone (see Case Study: Heart Disease in Diverse Populations ).

4. Have assumptions been made about sex and gender? Are these justified in light of available evidence? Are assumptions underpinning these research questions invalid when subjected to critical analysis? For example, cultural assumptions about gender difference can lead companies to market “gender-specific” products—in one case a sex-specific knee prosthesis—that may not be the best choice for consumers (see Case Study: De-Gendering the Knee ). Have researchers assumed a sex or gender binary? For example, recent research suggests that some transgender people may be at higher risk for heart disease, but transgender patients are not typically a focus for heart disease research (see Case Study: Heart Disease in Diverse Populations ).

5. Have any potentially relevant groups of research subjects been left out (e.g., female animals in drug research, women and gender-diverse people in systems biology, pregnant women and large people in automotive engineering)? (See Case Studies: Prescription Drugs , Systems Biology , and Inclusive Crash Test Dummies .)

6. What research questions would lead to more robust research designs and methods? For example, in studies of sexual differentiation, geneticists have revealed the shortcomings of scientific models that portrayed the female developmental pathway as “passive.” By challenging assumptions of passivity, researchers formulated new questions about the ovarian developmental pathway. New findings now suggest that both female and male development are active, gene-mediated processes (see Case Study: Genetics of Sex Determination ).

Related Case Studies 

Works cited.

Bührer, S., Gruber, E., Hüsing, B., Kimpeler, S., Rainfurth, C., Schlomann, B., Schraudner, M., & Wehking, S. (2006). Wie Können Gender-Aspekte in Forschungsvorhaben Erkannt und Bewertet Werden? München: Fraunhofer.

Klinge, I., & Wiesemann, C. (Eds.) (2010). Sex and Gender in Biomedicine: Theories, Methodologies, and Results . Göttingen: Universitätsverlag.

Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2010). Women’s Health Research: Progress, Pitfalls, and Promise . Washington, D.C.: United States National Academies Press.

Schiebinger, L. (Ed.) (2014). Women and Gender in Science and Technology, 4 vols. London: Routledge.

Schraudner, M., & Lukoschat, H. (Eds.) (2006). Gender als Innovationspotenzial in Forschung and Entwicklung . Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Institut.

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist Theories of Technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34 (1), 143-152 .

Wylie, A., & Conkey, M. (2007). Doing Archaeology as a Feminist. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 14 (3) , 209-216.

More Inclusive Gender Questions Added to the General Social Survey

The General Social Survey, or GSS, is one of the most important data sources for researchers studying American society. For the first time ever in its nearly 50-year history, the survey’s 2018 data release includes information on respondents’ self-identified sex and gender. The new data will allow researchers to measure the size of the transgender and gender non-binary populations and identify the challenges they face, information that can in turn shape public policy. The research of former Clayman Institute faculty fellow, Aliya Saperstein, supported this important change.

First fielded in 1972, the GSS is an especially important source of longitudinal data for social scientists. Longitudinal data derive value in part by asking identically worded questions at each time point. This allows researchers to attribute changes in how respondents answer demographic, attitudinal, and behavioral questions to real changes over time rather than to changes in question wording. Changing or adding questions is not simple. Old questions may be known to be valid, whereas new questions may pose challenges related to understandability and reliability. Researchers may be uncertain about whether new questions really measure what they believe they do. However, over time, old questions may not accurately reflect newer academic understandings of the concepts they are meant to measure. When budgets are fixed, survey designers make tradeoffs when deciding whether to keep an old question or update it.

On previous surveys, interviewers selected “male” or “female” on behalf of—and without directly asking—respondents. Yet, since the GSS’s first iteration, social scientists’ understanding of sex has changed markedly in ways that conflict with this measurement.

These tensions are embodied by the measurement of sex historically used by the GSS. On previous surveys, interviewers selected “male” or “female” on behalf of—and without directly asking—respondents. Yet, since the GSS’s first iteration, social scientists’ understanding of sex has changed markedly in ways that conflict with this measurement. For one, many scholars differentiate sex from gender. They understand sex to be based in biological factors, like anatomy, and comprised of categories like “male,” “female,” and “intersex.” Gender, on the other hand, involves behavioral expectations and is comprised of categories like “men,” “women,” “transgender,” and more. Additionally, social scientists acknowledge the importance of self-identification, and so seek to know how the respondent describes their own gender rather than how the interviewer describes it.

In recent years, sociologists have raised concerns about how surveys measure sex. Laurel Westbrook, associate professor of sociology at Grand Valley State University, and Aliya Saperstein, associate professor of sociology at Stanford University and former Clayman Institute faculty fellow, examined the questions used to measure sex on four of the largest and longest-running social science surveys, including the GSS. In an article published in Gender & Society in 2015, they critiqued survey questions for treating sex and gender as equivalent, immutable, and easily identified by others. According to Saperstein, precisely measuring sex and gender is an essential step in drawing attention to issues, like discrimination, faced by transgender and gender non-binary people. Saperstein said, “Whether we like it or not, numbers are what convince policymakers, what people turn to when they’re trying to make powerful rhetorical arguments about why something matters. They want a percentage.” Yet previously available data did not allow researchers to measure the size of the transgender and gender non-binary populations, let alone determine whether they are disadvantaged.

In the spring of 2014, Saperstein and Westbrook submitted a proposal to the GSS Board of Overseers to add several new questions related to sex and gender to the 2016 survey. Among these questions was a so-called two-step gender question, which asked respondents to separately identify the sex they were assigned at birth and their current gender. To illustrate that these questions were valid, Saperstein and Westbrook pre-tested the questions using national surveys. ( Their pre-test data is publicly available at openICPSR.) According to Saperstein, the board was unable to add their proposed questions to the 2016 GSS because of budgetary constraints.

Other sociologists had similar concerns about the sex measure on the GSS. D’Lane Compton, associate professor of sociology at the University of New Orleans, Kristen Schilt, associate professor of sociology at the University of Chicago, and Danya Lagos, doctoral candidate in sociology at the University of Chicago, submitted a proposal to add questions to the 2018 GSS. In addition to proposing several attitudinal questions, they advocated for the two-step gender question. Using previously published studies and other datasets, they provided evidence  to the members of the GSS Board of Overseers that the two-step question was reliable. Brian Powell, professor of sociology at Indiana University Bloomington and then-board member, said board members were concerned about measurement error—for instance, resulting from respondents misunderstanding the question—and small sample size. Still, many board members were convinced that the sex question historically used by the GSS did not accurately reflect the experience of some people in the United States and needed to be changed. “I think it’s worth it, and the board thought it was worth it,” Powell said.

The two-step gender question was adopted by the board and fielded in 2018. The adoption represents, in Powell’s words, a “truly collective effort” between the sociologists who advocated for the change, the GSS Board of Overseers, the GSS principal investigators, funders of the GSS such as the National Science Foundation, and NORC, the independent research organization at the University of Chicago that runs the GSS. Westbrook credits a number of researchers for advocating for the change in recent years, including Clayman Institute Director Shelley J. Correll and Stanford Professor (Emerita) of Social Sciences Cecilia Ridgeway, as well as Powell, Compton, Schilt and Lagos.

The two-step gender question was fielded to just over 1,400 respondents. The first question reads, “What sex were you assigned at birth? (For example, on your birth certificate)” and allows respondents to select “Female,” “Male,” “Intersex,” or “No answer.” The second question asks, “What is your current gender?” Respondents were able to select “Woman,” “Man,” “Transgender,” “A gender not listed here,” and “No answer.”

The 2018 data was released in March of this year, so researchers already can access its more than 1,000 variables, including the new two-step gender question. Saperstein said that nine, or 0.6%, of the 1,397 respondents who answered the two-step gender questions can be considered transgender or gender non-binary. Saperstein noted that, because of the small sample size, the data cannot yet be used to answer the most pressing, statistical questions about the transgender and gender non-binary populations. Researchers will have to wait for future data releases, which also will include the two-step gender question. For now, Saperstein said, “Just having the questions on the survey offers a different kind of a power, a kind of symbolic power that recognizes the actual gender diversity of the population.” 

The data eventually can be used to assess any disadvantages transgender and gender non-binary people are experiencing, which can be used to shape public policy. Compton, the sociologist from the University of New Orleans, said, “I think if we want to make real change and have resources and rights, we do need to have these numbers. Those are important.” 

(photo by Zackary Drucker for The Gender Spectrum Collection)

Recent Articles

“Not a Sprint, but a Relay Race:” Anita Hill’s Politics of Hope

Heroism, intimacy, and beliefs about life and death surface in historic research about drowning

The diverse and precarious world of the “influencer economy”

How Should Market Researchers Ask About Gender In Surveys?

New gender identity research shows we need to rethink the answer..

Posted September 4, 2016

• Find a therapist who understands gender identity

Over the past decade, I have designed, commissioned, and analyzed dozens of market research surveys. They have varied on virtually every dimension. Some were short with a handful of questions. Others were long, taking half an hour or more to complete. Participants provided their answers using pencil-and-paper, over the telephone, in person, and more recently, online or with mobile apps. The surveys differed in questions asked, samples targeted, and incentives offered.

Why do we need more than two gender categories?

But they all had one thing in common: how I elicited the participant’s gender. In virtually every case, I gave participants two options to choose from, male or female (see adjacent figure). In a handful of instances, I might have provided a third category, “Prefer not to say”. (I also confused gender with sex , which distinguishes between people based on biological differences, but that is a topic for another day).

Recent social science research, and the rising consciousness of gender equality as a social issue highlighted by movements around the world indicate that a dualistic way of categorizing gender as male and female in market research is outdated. It’s not just ethically wrong , but even practically speaking, it is incorrect and a bad practice.

Transgender is a third important gender category

Looking beyond male and female gender identities, transgender individuals represent a significant number of the population. One June 2016 study conducted by researchers at the Williams Institute used CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data and estimated that 0.6% of all US adults, or about 1.4 million people, identify as transgender. This means in a typical market research survey of 500 participants, we would expect to find around 3 transgender respondents. In some specific location-based samples, the numbers are even higher (For example, the District of Columbia had a transgender identity rate of 2.8%).

Another study conducted by psychologists Kristina Olson, Aidan Key, and Nicholas Eaton found that “transgender children are not confused, delayed, showing gender-atypical responding, pretending, or oppositional — they instead show responses entirely typical and expected for children with their gender identity .” They concluded: “The data reported in this paper should serve as further evidence that transgender children do indeed exist and that this identity is a deeply held one.”

And finally, there are important practical reasons for measuring transgender identity directly. Social work researcher Taylor Cruz found that transgender and gender non-conforming Americans receive poorer medical care, partly because many large surveys failed to gather accurate data by masking differences between different consumer groups. Numerous studies show that transgender individuals are stigmatized and discriminated against . So it seems to me that not acknowledging and measuring transgender identity explicitly in a market research survey is yet another form of discrimination against transgender individuals.

Beyond the transgender category

It is clear we need to add a transgender category to the gender question in market research surveys. But should we consider other gender categories as well? At the moment, New York City recognizes a total of 31 gender identities . They include categories like agender, androgyne, bi-gender, gender fluid, and genderqueer. Along similar lines, Facebook introduced 58 options to specify gender in 2014 and gave its users the option to select a preferred pronoun to address them. Some psychology researchers, too, have argued for the inclusion of categories like intersex and genderqueer, but cautioned that the terms and definitions are still evolving. And survey designers are starting to add some of these categories to their surveys as well.

As of now, the views of experts on how many non-overlapping gender categories exist, whether an exhaustive list can be created, what each one exactly means, and whether gender non-conforming individuals can reliably classify themselves into one of these categories are still in flux. It seems to me that we are not still ready to provide an accurate list of gender identity categories to survey respondents to choose from.

My recommended question to elicit gender in market research surveys

The state of the art advice on the question of how to elicit gender in surveys comes from a September 2014 report compiled by the Williams Institute titled “Best practices for asking questions to identify transgender and other gender minority respondents on population-based surveys.” It suggests using a two-step approach for surveys that are targeted toward transgender and other gender minority participants.

For broader user in market research surveys where gender may not necessarily be the study’s focus, I adapted their recommendation. I have designed the question in the adjacent figure that I have started to use in my surveys to elicit gender. My suggested question adds the transgender category as a third choice and a fourth category allowing respondents to write-in their gender. This approach is similar to Facebook’s option of a “Custom” gender box to be filled in by the user. And of course, the fifth and last option is a “Prefer not to say” for those respondents who may not want to reveal their gender to the market researcher.

Any well-designed market research survey is based on two core principles: the principle of accuracy and the principle of inclusiveness . A questionnaire should be designed to gather information accurately, using best practices of survey design that psychometricians have formulated over several decades. But this is not enough. A survey should also be inclusive. When a respondent has finished taking a survey, they should feel like the opinion they have provided will be valued just as much as every other survey-taker.

Business as usual, by asking the “What’s your gender?” question and providing only the “male” and “female” options to choose from violates both principles. It is an implicit endorsement of discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming respondents. And in some cases, the analysis may end up masking differences between respondent groups (because gender was not elicited correctly). Using a five-category question to provide gender that allows respondents to choose from male, female, transgender, and other, categories, and the freedom to write-in a custom response if other is chosen, will increase both accuracy and inclusiveness of market research surveys.

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank Eric Gould Bear for bringing this question to my attention and for an interesting conversation on this topic.

I teach marketing and pricing to MBA students at Rice University . You can find more information about me on my website or follow me on LinkedIn , Facebook , or Twitter @ud.

Utpal M. Dholakia, Ph.D. , is the George R. Brown Professor of Marketing at Rice University.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

25 Ways to Write Gender Survey Questions

by Formplus | Last updated: May 6, 2020

Related Posts

Customer loyalty: 25 survey questionnaires examples, 45 employee survey questions + [free template], 55 relationship & couple survey questionnaire, 25 student survey questions + [template examples].

In the past, it was somewhat easier to binarily categorize an individual as either male or female, gender-wise. These days, you may not be able to tell a person's gender or sexual orientation without asking or carrying out a gender survey. 

As we usher in a new decade, it is important to note that you simply cannot assume that an individual fits into predetermined sexual or gender constructs. This is why carrying out a gender survey has become common practice; especially in formal environments. 

Carrying out a gender survey is no mean task hence; it is important to know the kind of questions that should be contained in your survey plus other necessary information. If your gender survey puts respondents in a box, you may not achieve the most objective results at the end of the day. 

Importance of Gender Survey

Gender is ever-evolving and clearly one of the most discussed issues of our time. People who subscribe to gender identities that are not male or female are often looking for a medium to express the realities of their gender identities and this is what a gender survey offers. 

Gender surveys help organizations to accurately profile the gender spectra of their workforce and to develop gender-inclusive policies that cater to all genders present.

Gender surveys are important in institutions of learning because they help the school authorities to understand the gender balance, and how to protect minority gender identities from harassment and bullying. 

By carrying out a gender survey, you would gain more insight into the peculiarities of each gender identity. Gender surveys, in the end, help people of different gender identities to have a sense of inclusiveness in their societies. 

Types of Questions to Use for Gender Surveys

Close ended questions.

 A close-ended question is a type of question that limits the respondent to a few possible answers. This type of question typically requires survey respondents to choose from a limited set of predetermined responses which are already provided in the survey. 

There are different types of close-ended questions that you can include in your gender survey. Examples include dichotomous questions, multiple-choice questions that require respondents to choose from provided options and rating scale questions which assign a qualitative measure to a particular gender concept or ideology. 

Examples of Close-ended Questions 

• What is your current gender identity?
• Trans-males
• Trans-female
• Are you bi-sexual?

• For how long have you been trans-female? 
• 10-20 years
• More than 20 years

Open-Ended Questions

An open-ended question is a type of question that does not limit respondents to a range of predetermined answers. This type of question allows respondents to fully express themselves and provide thoughtful, deliberate, and sometimes, lengthy answers to gender survey questions.

The responses provided to open-ended questions can be up to a paragraph long or even an essay. Open-ended questions allow you to gain better insight into the respondent's thoughts, feelings and perceptions, and valuable information about the subject at hand. 

Examples of Open-ended Questions

• Describe a scenario where you were discriminated against because of your gender.
• What was it like when you found out you were gay?
• How do you deal with gender discrimination? 

Rating Questions

A rating question is a type of question that requires respondents to provide answers to survey questions by scaling these answers. It is a common type of question that allows survey respondents to rank their disposition towards the issues raised in the survey. 

Examples of Rating Questions  

• How would you rate the overall disposition of your gender identity?
• Not acceptable
• Mildly acceptable
• Very acceptable 
• How would you rate the level of gender bias in your immediate environment? 
• Non-existent
• Neutral 

Tips for Asking Gender Questions in Survey 

• Leave a Way Out

While drafting gender questions in a survey, it is important to always keep at the back of your mind the fact that gender is a spectrum. As such, you may not be able to fully reflect all gender types in your questions.

To avoid the problem of excluding persons of certain genders in your survey which may result in survey bias, it is best to leave a way out in your questions. Always include neutral options such as "others" or "doesn't apply" to avoid night survey dropout rates. 

• Don't Be Afraid to Ask

The essence of a survey is to get people's honest opinions about important issues such as gender.  Contrary to what is believed, people are quite enthusiastic about responding to well-crafted SOGI questions, in fact, people are more likely to skip questions about personal income than gender. 

The trick, however, is to carefully word your questions so that they are not partial, biased or judgmental. People want to talk about gender but more importantly, they need to feel safe responding to questions about their gender or sexual orientation. 

• Understand Your Audience

As earlier indicated, gender is socially defined and certain gender identities such as trans-male and trans-female are not formally recognized in many African and Asian societies. In this vein, it is important to craft gender questions in a survey; bearing in mind the gender stereotypes applicable in your survey environments. 

Transgender or queer gender questions and options might not be applicable to surveys in Africa or Asia as much as they are in Europe and America. Always research on the gender laws and stereotypes in a country before creating SOGI questions.  

• Don’t Ask Except It’s Important

 Gender is as private as it gets already as such, there's no need to ask questions that probe unnecessarily into the personal lives of the respondents. Unless you plan to actually make use of the survey response data from a particular gender question, there's no reason to include it in your survey. 

Sensitive gender questions in your survey may lead to high survey dropout rates or survey bias. When you ask the right questions, you would get meaningful insight into different gender identities and sexual orientations. 

Read more about asking gender questions in a demographic survey 

Gender Survey Questions Examples

• Prefer to self describe
• Prefer not to say  
• Androsexual
• Prefer to self describe 
• Prefer not to say 
• Prefer not to say
• 10-15 years
• 15-20 years
• 20 years and above
• Highlight the stereotypes commonly faced due to your gender identity. 
• Non-conforming
• What triggered your change of gender identity?
• Government institutions
• Prefer to self-describe 
• Prefer to self-describe
• 10 years and above
• How did you find out you were bi-sexual?
• What support systems do you have as a trans-male?
• What support systems do you have as a trans-female? 

What is Sex?

Sex refers to the biological, genetic, and physiological factors that typically define individuals as being male, female, or hermaphrodite. According to MedicalNewsToday , sex can be viewed as the biological differences between males and females, such as the genitalia and genetic differences.

This means that sex is strictly a biological construct that is determined naturally during the conception process. It is important to note that in many instances, an individual's biologically assigned sexual orientation may not tally with his or her preferred gender identity. 

Also, there are some individuals who embody male and female biological and physiological features. Such individuals are referred to as hermaphrodites or intersex. 

What is Gender?  

Gender is a social phenomenon that consists of a range of socially defined characteristics of masculinity and femininity. According to the Swiss Agency of Development and Control , gender is determined by the conception of tasks, functions, and roles attributed to women and men in society.

It is a flexible concept that typically differs from one society to another and can be changed over time. It is important to note that gender is a social spectrum that encompasses a wide range of possibilities between and beyond masculinity and femininity. 

While many societies attempt to create a correspondence between one's sex and gender identity, it is important to note that this is not always the case. An individual may be born male but subscribe to femininity with regards to his gender and vice versa. 

Differences between Sex and Gender

• Sex is biologically-defined while gender is socially constructed. One's sex is almost always determined at conception and is a function of hormones, chromosomes, and other physiological features while one's gender is defined by social norms, beliefs, and preferences.
• Sex is almost always binary while gender is a spectrum. 
• Sex is due to nature while gender results from socio-cultural nurturing.
• Gender is flexible while sex is mostly fixed. 

Types of Gender

 Male is a gender type that is in line with masculinity and is typically used to refer to individuals (men and boys) who are physiologically and biologically constructed as male. Males have XY chromosomes and embody other genetically defined characteristics of maleness. 

Males are cisgenders because they align with the social conditioning of their sex. In many societies, males are expected to be natural leaders, strong, aggressive, logically-driven, ambitious, sexual, physical, wealth-oriented, bold, risk-takers and emotionally-independent individuals, unlike their female counterparts. 

Female is a gender type that aligns with femininity and is typically used to define individuals (women and girls) who are physiologically and genetically conditioned as female. Females have XX chromosomes and embody other biological criteria that define femaleness. 

Females are cisgenders because they align with the gender stereotype of their sex. In many societies, females are socially conditioned to be weak, subservient, domesticated, emotionally-driven, emotionally-dependent, submissive, withdrawn, careful, sexually-appealing and fragile, unlike their male counterparts. 

Transmale is a gender type for individuals who are born female and identify as male. In other words, it refers to an individual who was labeled female at birth but chooses to identify as male, gender-wise because she has a strong masculine identity. 

Trans males often undergo a process of gender reassignment or transitioning that may involve certain surgical procedures plus social dynamism, and allows them to fully integrate with their gender identity. In recent times, there has been a lot of advocacy for transmale inclusion and non-discrimination in society. 

• Trans-Female

Trans-female is a gender type that includes all male-to-female transgender individuals who are born male but choose femininity as their gender identity. Just like trans-males, trans-females often undergo gender reassignment or transitioning in order to fully integrate with their new identity. 

• Gender Queer

GenderQueer is a gender identity that typically defines individuals who do not subscribe to conventional gender distinctions but instead, identifies as none, one or a combination of gender types. It refers to a spectrum of gender identities that are outside the conventional gender binary. 

GenderQueer is also referred to as non-conforming or non-binary and involves transitioning between and among gender identities of male and female. Individuals who identify as genderqueer maintain that their gender is fluid, flexible and can shift from time to time as they evolve.

Types of Sexual Orientation  

To be bi-sexual means being sexually attracted to both men and women. Bisexuality is a sexual orientation that defines people who are not exclusively physically and emotionally attracted to individuals of a particular gender type at different times of their lives. 

To be gay means to be attracted to an individual of the same sex as you are. According to the Australian Psychological Society , same-sex attraction is as normal and natural as heterosexual attraction; in fact, 1 in every 10 persons identify as gay.

To be asexual means to not experience any form of sexual attraction. Asexuality is a sexual orientation that defines individuals who are not interested in having penetrative or non-penetrative sex. with another individual even if they find such a person physically attractive. 

This sexual orientation refers to people in the asexual spectrum who only experience sexual or emotional attraction in certain situations. Such situations may involve after they must have formed a strong emotional or romantic connection with a partner.

• Other types of sexual orientation include pansexual , bi-curious , allosexual , aromantic , androsexual . 

Why Should You Use Formplus for Gender Surveys? 

Formplus is an online data gathering platform that you can use to collect and process form responses in real-time. This platform allows you to create different types of gender surveys and share them with multiple persons at the same time. 

It has a unique customization feature that allows you to personalize your surveys, and include background images, preferred color themes, logos, image fields, and custom integrations. You can modify the Formplus survey template to gather gender survey responses from your target audience. 

With Formplus, you can swiftly analyze survey responses by downloading survey response data as CSV files directly. This makes it easier to sort gender survey responses. 

As with other types of surveys , having the right questions goes a long way to determine the success of your survey. Gender is a sensitive survey niche because it often involves individuals revealing information that is personal to them. 

Therefore, it is best to always craft gender surveys to be objective, professional and straight to the point. In this article, we've highlighted a number of important information that you should always remember when it comes to creating gender survey questions. 

More importantly, it is best to create online gender surveys using data-gathering platforms like Formplus because online gender surveys are easier to administer, track and analyze. Visit Formplus today to create your unique and personalized online gender survey forms. 

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Quantitative Analysis of Gender Stereotypes and Information Aggregation in a National Election

Affiliations Dipartimento di Scienze Statistiche e Matematiche “Silvio Vianelli”, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America

Affiliation Dipartimento di Fisica e Chimica, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy

Affiliation Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, Turku, Finland

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Dipartimento di Fisica e Chimica, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy, Center for Network Science and Department of Economics, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary

• Michele Tumminello, 
• Salvatore Miccichè, 
• Jan Varho, 
• Jyrki Piilo, 
• Rosario N. Mantegna

• Published: March 26, 2013
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910
• Reader Comments

By analyzing a database of a questionnaire answered by a large majority of candidates and elected in a parliamentary election, we quantitatively verify that (i) female candidates on average present political profiles which are more compassionate and more concerned with social welfare issues than male candidates and (ii) the voting procedure acts as a process of information aggregation. Our results show that information aggregation proceeds with at least two distinct paths. In the first case candidates characterize themselves with a political profile aiming to describe the profile of the majority of voters. This is typically the case of candidates of political parties which are competing for the center of the various political dimensions. In the second case, candidates choose a political profile manifesting a clear difference from opposite political profiles endorsed by candidates of a political party positioned at the opposite extreme of some political dimension.

Citation: Tumminello M, Miccichè S, Varho J, Piilo J, Mantegna RN (2013) Quantitative Analysis of Gender Stereotypes and Information Aggregation in a National Election. PLoS ONE 8(3): e58910. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910

Editor: Rodrigo Huerta-Quintanilla, Cinvestav-Merida, Mexico

Received: November 26, 2012; Accepted: February 7, 2013; Published: March 26, 2013

Copyright: © 2013 Tumminello et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: JP and JV acknowledge financial support from Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Two widely investigated topics of political science concern the role of gender stereotypes of female and male candidates in elections [1] – [4] and the process of information aggregation occurring in a voting procedure [5] , [6] . The process of information aggregation in a voting procedure has mainly been investigated so far in settings inspired by the earliest mathematical models of voting in elections dating back to Condorcet’s work in the eighteenth century. Specifically, recent works have focused on the information aggregation process occurring in a Jury or a Committee [7] , [8] and on voting procedures where candidates are assumed to choose political profiles in response to information obtained by election results and exogenous factors leading to polarization in candidates’ choices [9] , [10] . A line of research across economics and political science considers information aggregation in voting as an example where a social institutional infrastructure synthesizes information held by many people. The other prominent example of institution synthesizing information held by many people is the financial market where individual beliefs of investors are aggregated when they collectively act to perform price discovery [11] .

The role of gender stereotypes has been mainly investigated to assess whether citizens utilize gender information to infer candidates’ political orientations, especially in the presence of low-informed voters [1] – [4] . Almost all studies found in the literature have been performed with empirical analyses investigating US and Canadian elections. The general consensus is that there are voters’ expectations of greater female competency on welfare issues, such as dealing with poverty or the aged, and less competency on military and defense issues [1] . In the framework of US politics, empirical evidence has been obtained showing that the greatest political distance in US House race is perceived by voters when opponent candidates are a Democratic female candidate against a Republican male candidate [2] . This observation suggests that women Democratic candidates have, or are perceived with, a political profile which is more liberal than the one of the corresponding male Democratic candidate.

In the present study, we investigate the role of gender stereotypes and information aggregation in a parliamentary election of a European country. Specifically, we investigate the election of the Finland’s parliament of April 2011. We choose to investigate this election because it is available detailed public information about the political profile publicly presented by a large set of candidates and elected. This is possible due to the initiative of Helsingin Sanomat, which is the largest Finnish newspaper. During the electoral campaign, Helsingin Sanomat asked all candidates to complete a questionnaire of 31 questions concerning welfare, pensions, the economy, taxes, defense, foreign and domestic affairs, municipalities and the central government. After the elections the database of the answers of all candidates was made available for research by Helsingin Sanomat.

By studying this special database, we are able to analyze the political profile made public by many candidates and elected. Specifically, we analyze the relationships between political profile and a series of information about the candidate comprising gender, party membership, electoral success (estimated by the number of obtained votes) and other metadata information. It should be noted that, differently from previous studies, our investigation is primarily focused on the political profile offered by candidates rather than on the ones perceived by informed or low-informed voters. In other words, we study the role of gender and party membership in the characterization of the political profile made public by candidates. We verify the presence of gender stereotypes in female candidates and we observe that successful candidates are in general more homogeneous in their political profile than non-elected candidates. We interpret this finding as a form of information aggregation realized by the voting procedure. We notice that the information aggregation follows at least two different patterns. In the first pattern, the most successful candidates are the ones able to make a political offer which summarizes the political expectations of the political center of the country. In the second pattern, successful political profiles manifest clear dissimilarity from opposite political parties that are representing political views which are different in policy positions and ideologies.

Materials and Methods

We investigate the answers that candidates for the Finnish parliamentary elections held in April 2011 provided to a survey organized by Helsingin Sanomat. The purpose of the questionnaire was to allow voters to compare their views to those of the candidates made available online during the electoral campaign before the election, so as to make a more informed voting decision. A similar questionnaire by Helsingin Sanomat has been available for all elections since 2000, but here we focus only on the responses of the candidates for the 2011 parliamentary elections because the entire database of answers has been made available for research only for this election. Data is available and discussed in the online blog http://blogit.hs.fi/hsnext/ .

The questionnaire has 31 questions (see supporting information file Questions S1 ). For 29 questions only one answer can be provided choosing it among a variable number of possible answers. In our analysis we use these 29 questions, leaving out two multiple-choice questions with 26 and 15 possible answers (Q21 and Q31 of the questionnaire). Among candidates, 1,803 out of a total number of 2,315 candidates answered the survey. Among them there are 181 out of the 200 parliament members eventually elected. In addition to all answers provided by the candidates, the data made available by Helsingin Sanomat also contains information on the respondents, including name, age, gender, party, election district and education level.

The 200 elected members of the Finnish parliament are chosen in 15 election districts. With the exception of the Åland district, which always elects a single member, the number of elected members of each district depends on the size of the electorate of the district. The election system is party-list proportional, using the D’Hondt method for allocating seats. Within parties, seats are allocated in the order of votes received.

In the 2011 elections 8 out of 17 political parties that nominated candidates obtained at least one seat in the parliament. In addition, one independent candidate was elected. Before the election there have been three large political parties, KESK (Center party, a centrist, agrarian, and liberal political party), KOK (National Coalition Party, a right-wing, pro-European political party), and SDP (the Social Democratic Party), but in the election PS (the True Finns, a populist and nationalist party) obtained 39 seats, up from 4, overtaking KESK as the third largest party. For a description of the parties participating to the election see supporting information file Parties S1 .

Results and Discussion

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

Comparison between the probability mass function of the number of common answers between respondents, separately for candidates and elected (top panel) and disaggregated by gender (bottom panel). The probability mass functions are obtained by considering the answers of all 1,793 candidates who provided information about the gender, and the subset of 181 elected candidates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.g001

Fig. 1a shows that the similarity of political profile is higher for elected than for candidates. The information aggregation process of the voting therefore produces a convergence of the successful political profiles towards a consensus political profile present in the majority of voters. Fig. 1b shows the role of gender both for candidates and elected. We observe that female candidates and elected have political profiles more homogeneous than male candidates and elected respectively. We begin discussing the role of gender in shaping the political profile of candidates and elected.

Political profile of candidates: the role of gender

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.t001

In summary, female candidates and elected candidates of some parties present an average political profile systematically more homogeneous than the corresponding male candidates or elected.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.t002

Political profile of elected respondents

We have shown in Fig. 1a that the degree of similarity of elected respondents is higher than the one of the whole set of candidates. We interpret this result as a manifestation of the process of information aggregation that is taking place in a voting procedure. In our view the voting procedure selects the political offers having major consensus in the population of voters or in large subsets of it.

To obtain evidence of information aggregation in the voting procedure, we compare the set of elected with the set on non-elected according to the answers provided to the Helsingin Sanomat survey, along the same lines followed in the characterization of female and male candidates. Table 3 summarizes the over-expressed and under-expressed answers for elected and non-elected respondents. The two groups show a statistically tested over-expression or under-expression of specific answers in 9 out of 29 questions. Over-expressions and under-expressions reported in Table 3 confirm the information aggregation process. In fact, elected parliament members are characterized by the lack of over-expression of more extreme political positions that were present in the survey. For instance, the set of elected presents under-expression of the political positions that Finland should never join the NATO, and should leave the European Monetary Union. Elected are characterized by a political offer with an over-expression of political positions saying that the current organization of the military service is fine, and that the age of retirement should neither be decreased nor increased by several years.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.t003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.t004

Scatter plot of the geometric mean of the votes obtained versus the number of common answers for each pair of candidates belonging to the four parties KESK (top left), KD (top right), SDP (bottom left) and VIHR (bottom right). Yellow triangles denote pairs of non elected candidates, whereas blue circles denote pairs of candidates that have been elected.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.g002

To test how information aggregation occurs among parties, we have compared the degree of similarity among members of different parties for the two sets of elected and non elected candidates. Though the similarity among members of different parties is, on average, lower than the similarity among members of the same party, the similarity among different parties is, in several cases, higher for elected than for non-elected participants. In fact, the results, reported in Table 5 , show that the voting process has two major effects: (i) it tends to smooth out the differences between several parties competing for the political center or for contiguous political areas, and (ii) it increases political polarization when the successful candidates bear political profiles which are at the boundary of some political dimension. In Table 5 we observe the effect (i), i. e., higher values of similarity for elected than non-elected, for several pairs of parties at a 0.001 statistical threshold. Exceptions are the pairs PS-VIHR and KESK-VAS which are showing lower similarity in elected rather than in non-elected at a 0.001 threshold, therefore supporting the presence of the effect stated in (ii).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.t005

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.t006

Scatter plot of the geometric mean of the votes obtained versus the number of common answers for pairs of candidates belonging to four pairs of parties. Each pair of candidates is formed by one candidate from one party and the other from a different party. The pairs of parties are: SPD-KD (top left), KD-KESK (top right), KOK-VAS (bottom left) and PS-VIHR (bottom right). Yellow triangles denote pairs of non elected candidates whereas blue circles denote pairs of candidates that have been elected.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.g003

Conclusions

In summary we have quantitatively verified that (i) on average female candidates are publicly offering political profiles which are more compassionate and caring more about social welfare issues than male candidates and (ii) the voting procedure acts as a process of information aggregation. It should be noted that our results present a new research perspective on the role of gender stereotypes in voting. In fact in our study we quantitatively detect the presence of gender stereotypes in the political offer of female candidates. The political science literature has been mainly focused so far on the topic of the role of gender as information conveying compassionate and welfare oriented traits of the female candidates to the low-informed voter [1] – [4] . In our study we reverse the perspective and we show that female candidates are effectively signaling compassionate and welfare oriented political traits. Our study also shows that elected parliament members are characterized by the lack of over-expression of more extreme political positions supporting the view that voting is an information aggregation procedure. We also show that this information aggregation can occur in at least two distinct ways one reflecting competition among candidates for providing an offer satisfying the political center of the nation and/or of each party and the other involving offers of distinctive political profiles of candidates of political parties bearing extreme positions in some political dimensions.

Supporting Information

Table SI1 , Intra-party correlation between mean number of votes of pairs and similarity, but with arithmetic mean of votes in place of geometric mean. All the correlation values are statistically significant with a statistical threshold of 0.001. Table SI2 , Like Table VI of the main text, but with arithmetic mean of votes in place of geometric mean.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.s001

Parties S1.

Basic information about Finnish political parties.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.s002

Questions S1.

English translation of the questionnaire used to perform the survey.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058910.s003

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: MT SM JP RNM. Analyzed the data: MT SM JV JP RNM. Wrote the paper: MT SM JV JP RNM.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 11. Easley D, Kleinberg J (2010) Networks, Crowds, and Markets. Reasoning About a Highly Connected World. New York: Cambridge University Press, first edition.
• 12. Tumminello M, Miccichè S, Lillo F, Varho J, Piilo J, et al.. (2011) Community char- acterization of heterogeneous complex systems. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment : P01019.