Estudio de la “gestión de riesgos laborales” en las prácticas de

Social role theory developed by Alice Eagly (1987) is a theoretical perspective based on the principle that men and women behave differently in social situations and take on different roles, due to the expectations that society puts upon them. Historically, social role theory was developed as a gender related theory and Eagly (1987) describes the social roles that regulate behaviour in adult life.

Aspects of social behaviour, personality, and abilities differ between women and men (Eagly, 1995; Halpern, 1997). According to psychological dispositions of theories of origin, women and men possess sex-specific evolved mechanisms; they differ psychologically and tend to occupy different social roles. In contrast, in the social structural theory, because men and women tend to

occupy different social roles, they become psychologically different in ways that adjust them to these roles. However, one important feature shared by these differing theories of origin is that both offer a functional analysis of behaviour that emphasises an adjustment to environmental conditions (Eagly & Wood, 1999).

As opposed to using a cultural approach, social role theory uses a structural approach to sex differences in that structural pressures such as family, organisations and communities have caused men and women to behave in different ways (Dulin, 2007). The perception exists that people have a social role based solely on their gender; these stereotypic gender roles are formed by social norms (shared expectations about appropriate qualities or behaviours) that apply to people of a certain category or social position (Eagly, 1987).

Eagly (1987) asserts that society has shared expectations about women, and these expectations form female gender roles, and shared expectations about men form male gender roles. In turn, people tend to do what is expected of them or act the way that these roles imply and, as a result, men and women learn different skills, thus perpetuating sex differences. Gender roles are more general and encompass a greater scope of definition of male and female roles. In contrast, social roles are more specific to roles in family and work life. Dulin (2007) explains that Eagly believed that social roles guide people’s behaviours more than the gender they inhabit.

For the purpose of this study social role theory ties in well with bio-ecological systems theory becausesocial role theory firstly, emphasises the roles, duties and obligations (Ashforth, 2001)

that a father has towards the developing child within the microsystem. Secondly, the child’s

experiences are mainly centred around their parents, family, peers, church, school, neighbourhood and every one of these social actors has a role to play in the child’s development (Paquette & Ryan,

2001). Thirdly, social role theory focuses on interactions between and among individuals, groups, societies, and economic systems as developed by the social systems in which people live (Dulin, 2007). Fourthly, social systems either promote or deter people in maintaining or achieving health and well-being (Council on Social Work Education, 2004). The systems referred to includes Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) five environmental systems which affects the child’s growth and with

which a child interacts - the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem and the chronosystem.

Individuals occupy many roles simultaneously, all of which impinge on their behaviour, work roles, such as leadership positions for instance, might override their gender roles and reduce gender differences (Eagly & Johnson, 1990). Social roles are influenced by the society in which we live (Eagly, 1987) and South Africa, according to StatsSA (2017), experiences widespread father absence or non-involvement of fathers as statistically one in two children grow up with an absent father. Even though we live in a statistically absent-father society, social roles are changeable and continually readjusting social processes as social role theory also implies that gender differences are flexible, because they are dependent on the immediate social role of individuals (Eagly, 1987).

In application to the current study, men through their social roles can reinforce negative or positive versions of gender and gender roles. The introduction of fatherhood intervention programmes promotes fatherhood and father involvement and negates against father non-involvement or father

absence. Father’s attending a fatherhood intervention programme reported that their relationships with their children were growing stronger. This was as a result of them doing more activities with their kids and taking more of an active interest in what was going on at school. Participation in programmes also had effects on their relationships as fathers commented that they were arguing less with their partners (Berlyn, Wise & Soriano, 2008). Fathers undergoing these types of programmes with positive results may themselves in turn become agents of change, readjusting their roles in society and influencing other fathers.

Flood (2011) asserts that men have been the focus in secondary and tertiary-based interventions, mainly as perpetrators only; and therefore, the focus needs to shift towards partners in prevention. He outlines six levels of strategies for working with men in a way to start thinking about the process of extending men’s involvement. These include; strengthening individual knowledge and skill;

promoting community education; educating service providers and other professionals; engaging, strengthening, and mobilizing communities, changing organizational practices and influencing policies and legislation.

Social role theory has been criticised by Archer (1996) who examined it against evolutionary theory as explanations for sex differences. Evolutionary theory attributes most sex differences to the consequences of sexual selection and the conflict that arises with the different reproductive strategies of the sexes. Archer (1996) concluded that, since evolutionary theory could explain other mammals’ sex differences, that it was a better explanation. Eagly (1997) however responded to Archer’s criticism of social role theory stating that she never intended for the theory to be an

interrelated theories, each of which illuminates certain aspects of the complex of psychological and social processes by which gendered behaviour is produced (Dulin, 2007).

In conclusion, social role theory recognises the historical division of labour between women who often assumed responsibilities at home and men who often assumed responsibilities outside the home. Accordingly, the behaviour of men and women is govern by the stereotypes of their social roles. However, social role theory also points out that gender differences are flexible, because they are dependent on the immediate social role of individuals. Thus, for the purpose of this study central to the social role theory is that the fathers themselves through their social roles can reinforce the promotion of fatherhood and father involvement.