Department of Psychology

Ateneo de Manila University

GUIDELINES FOR WRITING THESES and DISSERTATIONS

WHAT IS A THESIS/DISSERTATION? .

A thesis or dissertation is intended to showcase the research skills and concepts

learned by a student in Psychology. Through it, a student is expected to show
mastery of research skills in contributing to knowledge in Psychology. Both theses
and dissertations must reflect the ability to conduct research and write the research
report in a scholarly manner worthy of publication. In addition, doctoral
dissertations are expected to make a unique and significant contribution to
psychological knowledge. For both theses and dissertations, scholarly writing expectations include a
substantive and organized build-up of arguments, proper format and style (as prescribed by the APA
Manual, 5th ed. and the department guidelines), and correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling (note that
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary is the standard spelling reference of the APA).

OVERVIEW OF THE CONTENTS OF A THESIS/DISSERTATION

FRONT MATERIAL (refer to attached sample for guidelines on format)

Title page
Approval sheets (1 recommending oral defense; 1 acceptance of paper)
Acknowledgments
Abstract
Table of Contents (including List of Tables and List of Figures)

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Review of Literature
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework
Statement of the Problem(s)
Hypotheses (if applicable)
Significance of the Study (for proposal, include in INTRODUCTION; for final paper,
integrate in DISCUSSION)
CHAPTER II
METHOD
Design
Setting (if applicable)
Participants
Measures
Procedure
Data Analysis (for proposal, include in METHOD; for final paper, integrate in RESULTS)
Limitations of the Study (for proposal, in METHOD; for final paper, integrate in
DISCUSSION)
CHAPTER III
RESULTS

CHAPTER IV
DISCUSSION
(note that the subsections in this chapter may be organized and integrated in flexible ways, depending on
the nature of the topic, study design, writing style, etc.)
Limitations
Implications

CHAPTER V (optional)
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

APPENDIXES

GENERAL FORMAT GUIDELINES .

The following general guidelines apply throughout the manuscript:

SPACING
‰ Double-space throughout the paper, including entries in tables
‰ Double-space between entries in the Reference section; single-space within
entries
‰ Spacing between subsections or subheadings within a chapter should at least be
double-spaced, but may be triple- or quadruple-spaced for added clarity

FONT
‰ Use 12-size font throughout the paper, including entries in tables
‰ Use either Times New Roman or Courier (serif typefaces) for text and Arial or Helvetica (sans serif
typefaces) for figures

MARGINS
‰ Use a 1.25-inch margin for the left side; 1-inch for all other sides of the page (note that corner
brackets are no longer required by the Office of Graduate Services)

JUSTIFICATION
Left justify throughout the paper

INDENTATION
Paragraph indentation should be 5-7 spaces or the normal tab default

PAGINATION
‰ ALL page numbers are placed at the upper right hand corner of each page
‰ The first page of a new chapter is not numbered but is still counted
‰ Lower-case Roman numerals are used for the front material, but beginning only with the
Acknowledgments (or page iv). The title and signature pages are counted but not numbered.
HEADINGS & SUBHEADINGS
‰ Chapter titles should be boldface, uppercase, and centered on top of the page.
‰ Format of succeeding headings and subheadings (whether italicized, upper- and lowercase, flushed
left, etc.) should conform to APA rules on levels of headings (see pp. 111-115 of the APA Manual,
5th ed.)

. ABSTRACT .

Content: This section should contain a brief, comprehensive summary of the

contents of the thesis: the research problem, methods, and results and conclusions.

Format: Text should not exceed 120 words and is written in past tense. The first
line is not indented; the text is left justified. The heading ABSTRACT should be
bold, centered, and in uppercase.

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Content: The introductory chapter begins with the overview of the study. You should describe the
general problem area you are studying in a manner that is sufficient for an educated but non-psychologist
reader to understand. Here is where you discuss the motivation for studying the problem: What theoretical
and/or practical situations brought about this study? Of what application is the problem or what is its
significance? The goal is to describe the problem in broad strokes, justify its study, and capture the
interest of the reader.

Format: The overview of the study has no heading. This, as well as the rest of the introduction, is written
in the present tense. Sections within this chapter follow one after the other, with no page breaks in
between.

Review of Literature

Content: This section discusses the theoretical foundations of the problem. The goal
is to develop your problem conceptually and place it in the context of previous
scientific work. Thus, a conceptual integration of previous research is needed. Point
out the themes, links, gaps, and inconsistencies in the literature with the aim to
provide a clearer conceptualization of the problem. Note that it is NOT the purpose of
this section to display how much literature you have read. Avoid presenting a litany of
past studies that are conceptually disconnected from each other. This section provides
justification for your problem and hypothesis: Why study these particular variables? Why propose these
particular hypotheses? Why study the problem with this method? What differentiates your approach from
what has been previously done?

Format: Unlike the other sections in Chapter I, this section is written in the past tense. Begin this section
with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase). To enhance organization, use subheadings (refer
to pages 111-115 of the APA Manual, 5th edition, on the rules on level of headings).
 Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

Content: This is the “creative” section of your work, where you define your research’s
theoretical/conceptual frame. It is different from the literature review, in that here you discuss your own
original integration of the major theories and/or frameworks that you intend to apply, which serves as the
basis of the conceptual definitions of your variables and the laws of interactions or presumed relationships
among them. The build-up of arguments from the literature review, to the theoretical/ conceptual
framework, to the research problem and hypothesis should be clear and logical.

Format: This section may or may not have a visual diagram illustrating the relationships among the
variables. Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase).

Statement of the Problem

Content: This section presents the specific research question(s). The statement of the problem should
have several characteristics: Firstly, it should be phrased in the form of a question; secondly, the question
should suggest a relationship between variables to be examined (unless the study is exploratory or
descriptive). Thirdly, the research question should imply the possibility of empirical testing.

Format: This section is written in the present tense. Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered,
upper- and lowercase).

Hypothesis (if applicable)

Content: This section is necessary only if you have a particular theory/framework/premise that you are
testing. In the case of exploratory research, for example, a hypothesis is not necessary.

Format: The hypothesis statement should contain the predicted relationship among the variables. Begin
this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase).

Significance of the Study

(for proposal, include in INTRODUCTION; for final paper, integrate in DISCUSSION)

Content: This section contains the theoretical and practical reasons why the research is being conducted.
It is where you justify why the study should be conducted at all.

Format: Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase).

CHAPTER II

METHOD

Content: Like the first chapter, the method chapter begins with an
overview of the design used for the study. The research design is the plan
or structure for conducting a study, whether it is experimental, quasi-
experimental, correlational, case-study, exploratory, etc. It summarizes
the set of procedures that you will use to obtain the data to answer your
research problems (e.g., how participants were assigned to groups).
Format: The overview has no heading. The entire chapter is written in past tense, unless in a proposal,
where it is written in the future tense. Sections in this chapter follow one after the other, with no page
breaks in between.

Participants

Content: This section should include the number and relevant characteristics of the respondents, as well
as the sampling plan or design.

Format: Tables and/or figures may be used to simplify the presentation of the demographic
characteristics of the participants.Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and
lowercase).

Setting (if applicable)

Content: This section is included only if the setting is of particular significance or importance; for
example, if a specific community or organization is being studied. Describe the relevant characteristics of
the setting, especially if this has bearing on the research problem, method, and results.

Format: Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase).

Measures

Content: In this section, discuss the conceptual and operational definition (a description of how variables
will be measured or observed) of each variable. In an experiment, the measurement of the dependent
variables is described here. If using an instrument, include the source, number of items and type of scale,
scoring, reliability, and validity of the instrument. If constructing your own instrument, include the details
of the steps/procedures you took to develop the scale.

Format: Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase).

Procedure

Pretest (or Pilot Phase)

Content: If applicable, this section contains everything about the pretesting process, including the
sample used, a description of the materials that were pretested, and the actual conduct of the pretest
procedures. Report the relevant results of your pretest and the resulting adjustments or modifications you
made, especially in terms of how these affect or determine the final sample, instruments, and procedures
that you employed in your study.

Actual Procedure

Content: This section contains the process used when conducting the actual study and includes the step-
by-step “recipe” beginning with how the subjects were contacted all the way to how the data were
collected. In an experiment, this is where you describe how the independent variables were manipulated
and how the extraneous variables controlled. This section should also contain the ethical procedures
applied in this study, for example, informed consent, debriefing procedures, etc.

Format: Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase). Subsections within
this section have headings that are italicized and flushed left. Depending on the complexity of the design
and/or procedures, additional subsections may be used (e.g., Apparatus and Materials; Manipulation of
the IV; etc.)

Data Analysis
(for proposal, include in METHOD; for final paper, integrate in RESULTS)

Content: This section describes the procedures on how the data are to be (or were) analyzed, be it
quantitative or qualitative data.

Format: In the proposal, begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase). In the
final paper, this is integrated in the Results chapter and has no separate subsection.

Limitations of the Study

(for proposal, in METHOD; for final paper, integrate in DISCUSSION)

Content: This section contains the theoretical and practical boundaries of the study. It includes the
parameters of the topic, subjects and method used. In other words, it will tell the reader that it will be
studying “this” but not “that”, and in “this way” but not “that way”. It also includes the limitations as to
the kind of results the study will generate.

Format: This section is written in the present tense. Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered,
upper- and lowercase).

CHAPTER III
.
RESULTS

Content: Following the background and theoretical/conceptual framework provided in Chapter I, and the
operationalizations and procedures from Chapter II, you are now in a position to present the results of
your study in Chapter III. Here is where you present results that are relevant to the problems and
hypotheses of your study, and the statistical treatments you used to analyze the data. Avoid tangential
analyses, even if significant (if necessary, place in a separate subsection on supplemental analyses).
Always support your conclusions or claims with the relevant quantitative (statistics) or qualitative data.
As a general rule for quantitative data, descriptive (e.g., M, SD) and inferential statistics (e.g., t, F, r) are
reported, including other relevant information for evaluating effects (e.g., p, df). Reserve discussion of
implications and explanations of the results in the Discussion section. See page 10 for other guidelines in
writing this chapter.

Format: Results may be organized according to research question and

hypothesis, or according to variable. Make judicious use of subsections
and subheadings. Use tables and figures to clearly present results and
statistical data. APA guidelines must be strictly followed. For
formatting guidelines of tables and figures, refer to pages 147-201 of
the APA manual, 5th edition. APA conventions in reporting statistics
must also be followed (refer to pages 137-146 of the APA manual, 5th edition). This section is generally
written in the past tense except when referring to a table or figure within the text (for example, “Table 1
shows that…”).
 CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

Content: This chapter is where results are interpreted, evaluated, and

placed in context. Interpret your findings: What do they mean? Discuss
why the proposed hypotheses (if any) were or were not supported. Place
your findings in context by discussing how the results relate to previous
findings/research. What do they contribute to the research area?

Discuss the limitations of your study, and note internal and external validity issues in relation to the topic,
design, participants, tools, and other problems encountered in the conduct of the research. This section
may be integrated in the general discussion or placed in a separate section (depending on the nature of
your study). In the latter case, begin the section with a heading (i.e., Limitations), bold, centered, and in
upper- and lowercase.

Format: The entire discussion is written in the present tense. To enhance organization, use subheadings
(refer to pages 111-115 of the APA Manual, 5th edition, on the level of headings).

Implications

Content: What are the implications of your findings for theory, research, and application or practice?
This section discusses the key ideas that the reader can draw from the study that may be applied to similar
areas of concern. Comment on future directions in this area, including implications on how the work can
be extended or improved for both research and practice.

Format: Begin this section with a heading (bold, centered, upper- and lowercase).

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS (optional)

Content: This chapter summarizes your most important findings and the implications and conclusions
that can be derived from them in a concise manner. Note that it is not meant to be a repetition of your
Discussion chapter. It contains the “take-home” message, so to speak, such that a reader would have an
essential grasp of what you did and what you found. Such a chapter is particularly important for lengthy
and complex manuscripts.

Format: The chapter is written in past tense. Use subsections and subheadings as necessary for clarity
and organization.

REFERENCES .

Content: This section lists all references cited in the text. If an abstract rather
than an actual journal/book is utilized, this should be cited as such. Electronic
references (e.g., Internet sources) must also be formally cited. For citation and
formatting guidelines, refer to pages 215-281 of the APA Manual, 5th edition.
APA guidelines must be strictly followed.
Format: The heading REFERENCES should be bold, all CAPS, and centered on top of the first page of
this section. References follow a hanging indent format. Single-space within entries, but double-space
between entries.

APPENDIX

Content: The appendixes section should include the instruments, and other special materials, tools, and
instructions that were used in the study. It may also contain information that may be too detailed for the
text but which some may want to refer to (e.g., complex scoring procedures; a different type of analysis).
No raw data are included here.

Format: Each appendix should be placed in its own separate page, and affixed with its own heading
(APPENDIX A; APPENDIX B, so on). Headings should be in boldface, uppercase, and centered on top
of each page.
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE CHECKLIST .

;LOCATE RELEVANT LITERATURE

… Identify key authors and journals
… Use bibliographic reference sources
… Use computerized literature searches
… Obtain reprints and preprints
… Look at literature from other disciplines
… Scan tables of contents of key journals
… Use reference lists from articles, chapters, and books
… Use primary sources
… Avoid the popular press
;CRITICALLY READ THE LITERATURE
… Identify conceptual and methodological themes
… Identify strengths and weaknesses of individual articles
… Identify strengths and weaknesses of field as a whole
… Collect photocopies or notes
;PREPARE TO WRITE
… Make an outline of the sections and subsections of your review to ensure substantive and logical
build-up of arguments and ideas

… Include page allocations

… Limit the scope of your review; weed out conceptually irrelevant studies
… Organize the papers and notes of the literature you will cover
;WRITE THE REVIEW
… Write the introduction, sections and subsections
… Use transitions and integrative phrasing
… Synthesize and critically analyze the literature
;SET THE STAGE FOR YOUR FRAMEWORK, PROBLEMS, AND HYPOTHESES
;BE CAREFUL NOT TO PLAGIARIZE!
Adapted from Cone, J.D. & Foster, S.L. (1999). Dissertations and theses from start to finish: Psychology
and related fields. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
 RESULTS CHECKLIST .

;PRESENT DATA RELEVANT TO PROBLEMS AND HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

;PRESENT RESULTS IN AN ORDERLY, LOGICAL WAY
… Order and sequence the results
• According to problem/hypothesis
• Or according to variable

… Support results, conclusions with the relevant statistical data

• Name of statistic
• Relevant details about the statistic
• Statistical values for significant effects
• Means
• Standard deviations
• Sample size

; WORD RESULTS IN CLEAR AND STRAIGHTFORWARD MANNER

; FOLLOW CONVENTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGY REGARDING PRESENTATION OF
STATISTICS

; CREATE WELL-CRAFTED, CLEAR TABLES

; PREPARE WELL-CRAFTED, CLEAR FIGURES

Adapted from Cone, J.D. & Foster, S.L. (1999). Dissertations and theses from
start to finish: Psychology and related fields. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
 DISCUSSION CHECKLIST .

;SUMMARIZE YOUR FINDINGS

… Avoid technical detail
… Use clear language
;INTERPRET YOUR FINDINGS
;PLACE YOUR FINDINGS IN CONTEXT
… Consider how your findings converge with, clarify, or contradict past findings
;CONSIDER THE IMPLICATIONS OF YOUR FINDINGS
… Theoretical implications
… Research implications
… Practical implications
;INCLUDE A HUMILITY SUBSECTION
… Consider internal validity issues
… Consider external validity issues
… Consider measurement issues
… Consider statistical issues
;INCLUDE COMMENTS ABOUT FUTURE DIRECTIONS
;USE THESE TIPS:
… Be a critical thinker
… Avoid common problems
… Select an appropriate organization

Source: Cone, J.D. & Foster, S.L. (1999). Dissertations and theses from start
to finish: Psychology and related fields. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.

These guidelines were prepared and approved by the

Faculty of the Department of Psychology
SY 2003-2004
 Department of Psychology
Ateneo de Manila University

Roles and responsibilities regarding thesis or dissertation work

The Student
‰ formally registers or enrolls for thesis/dissertation direction
‰ initiates appointments with thesis adviser
‰ conceptualizes the research problem and develops its theoretical groundwork
‰ ensures that the manuscript conforms to the structure and format prescribed by the APA,
Psychology Department, and Office of Graduate Services (OGS)
‰ is responsible for meeting the Department and OGS deadlines for oral defenses and
submitting the final and revised copies of the manuscript

The Adviser
‰ makes herself or himself available for advising
‰ provides guidance, direction, and support in the conceptualization, data-collection, analysis,
and writing phases
‰ makes the recommendation when the thesis is ready for oral defense
‰ performs first-line editing and style reading
‰ checks that the manuscript conforms to the structure and format prescribed by the APA,
Psychology Department, and OGS
‰ suggests members of defense panel and style reader
The Panel Members
‰ reviews the manuscript submitted for oral defense
‰ may provide feedback to the adviser if the manuscript (whether in substance or format) is
deemed not ready for a defense
‰ asks questions pertaining to the thesis topic and the written report, provides constructive
feedback to the student, and evaluates the thesis/dissertation during the defense
‰ may provide advice on specific matters (e.g., instruments; statistical analysis) prior to the
defense

The Style Reader

‰ edits the manuscript according to APA, Psych Department, and OGS guidelines within 2
weeks from receipt of the revised and adviser-approved manuscript
‰ approves the final manuscript in terms of style and signs the style approval sheet(s)
‰ serves as a member of the panel (if a faculty member)
The Department Chairperson
‰ approves the final composition of the panel
‰ approves the manuscript’s readiness for defense in terms of general format (and not
necessarily substance)
 Department of Psychology
Ateneo de Manila University

Guidelines on schedules and deadlines for thesis or dissertation work

General guidelines (please refer to OGS for more specific rules and special cases)

As of the first semester, school year 2003-2004, graduate students who pass their oral defense are given a
period of ONE YEAR from the oral defense term to submit the final copies of the thesis to the Office of
Graduate Services (OGS) and the Department. (The “final copies of the thesis” refers to the final revised
copies of the manuscript, signed approval pages, OGS thesis abstract, and binding fees.) Students must
register for residency and pay the basic registration fee for the semester that they intend to submit the
final revised copies of the thesis.

Beyond this one-year period, the student will be charged with a Late Thesis/Dissertation Clearing Fee for
every semester that the manuscript is being processed by the Department. Note that the rule that allows a
maximum period (from the oral defense term) of 3 years for the master’s degree and 5 years for the
doctoral degree for the submission of the final manuscript will be strictly observed.

Note also that the student will be considered a graduate and conferred with the master’s/ doctoral degree
ONLY upon submission of the final thesis/dissertation. Likewise, the thesis title, letter grade, and credit
units will be indicated on the student’s transcript only upon submission of the final paper.

Department guidelines

For graduate students who intend to graduate within the same semester as the oral defense of their
thesis/dissertation:

The OGS sets a deadline, which is usually towards the end of the term, for submission of the
final, revised, unbound copies of the manuscript to their office. This deadline must be met in
order to be considered for graduation in that semester. This deadline is specified in the Loyola
Schools Academic Schedule, and may also be obtained from OGS, Registrar, or Department
personnel.

GIVEN THIS, THE DEPARTMENT SETS A DEADLINE FOR STUDENTS TO CONDUCT

THEIR ORAL DEFENSE. THIS IS USUALLY ON THE SATURDAY 5 WEEKS BEFORE
THE OGS DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF THE FINAL COPIES. The deadline is
necessary to provide the student with sufficient time to complete all the culminating work
involved in finalizing the thesis (i.e., content revisions, style checking, signing of approval sheets,
etc.), meet the OGS deadline, and graduate within that semester.
For graduate students who do NOT intend to graduate within the same semester as the oral defense of
their thesis/dissertation:

Graduate students who would like to defend their thesis/dissertation, but do not necessarily have
to graduate within the same term, have until the end of the semester to conduct their oral defense.
AN ORAL DEFENSE MAY BE SCHEDULED (ASSUMING THE AVAILABILITY OF THE
PANEL) UNTIL THE SATURDAY OF THE LAST WEEK OF REGULAR CLASSES,
BEFORE THE ONSET OF FINALS WEEK.

As provided by the OGS rules, the student has, henceforth, ONE YEAR to submit the final and
revised copies of the thesis/dissertation to the OGS and the Department.
 SAMPLE PAGES OF THE FRONT MATERIAL

NOTES:
1. Replace “Dissertation” with “Thesis” as necessary (refer to title page and approval sheets)

2. Replace “Doctor of Philosophy” with “Master of Arts” or “Bachelor of Arts” or “Bachelor of

Science” as necessary (refer to title page and approval sheets)

3. The title should be in inverted triangle form (refer to title page)

4. Note that the MA thesis panel has 3, not 4 members (refer to second approval sheet). In this
case, place the name of the adviser in the last or fourth line, and the Dean’s name, centered,
on a separate line below the panel members and adviser.

5. The Appendixes follow right after the References, and is not placed in a separate page unless
the remaining space below the References is insufficient (as is the case in this sample, refer
to page viii-ix)

6. The List of Tables and the List of Figures are placed in their own separate pages (refer to
pages x-xi)

7. Chapter I, page 1, immediately follows after the List of Figures

GENDER AND SOCIAL STATUS DIFFERENCES IN PERCEIVED TRAITS
AND GOVERNANCE-ABILITIES OF POLITICAL CANDIDATES

A Dissertation

Presented to

the Faculty of the Graduate School

Ateneo de Manila University

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

by

Maria Elizabeth Teresa J. Macapagal

2003

The dissertation entitled:

 GENDER AND SOCIAL STATUS DIFFERENCES IN PERCEIVED TRAITS

AND GOVERNANCE-ABILITIES OF POLITICAL CANDIDATES

submitted by Maria Elizabeth Teresa J. Macapagal, has been examined and is recommended

for Oral Defense.

______________________________________ __________________________________
MA. EMMA CONCEPCION D. LIWAG, PhD CRISTINA J. MONTIEL, PhD
Chairperson Adviser
Department of Psychology

_____________________________
JOSE M. CRUZ, SJ, PhD
Dean
School of Social Sciences

Comprehensive Examinations Passed: 09 and 16 February 2002.

 The Faculty of the Graduate School of the Ateneo de Manila University accepts the

dissertation entitled:

GENDER AND SOCIAL STATUS DIFFERENCES IN PERCEIVED TRAITS

AND GOVERNANCE-ABILITIES OF POLITICAL CANDIDATES

submitted by Maria Elizabeth Teresa J. Macapagal, in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology, major in Social Psychology.

______________________________ _____________________________________
ALMA S. DE LA CRUZ, PhD ANNA MIREN GONZALEZ-INTAL, PhD
Member Member

______________________________ ____________________________________
PATRICIA B. LICUANAN, PhD MA. ISABEL ECHANIS-MELGAR,
PhD
Member Member

_________________________________
CRISTINA J. MONTIEL, PhD
Adviser

________________________________
JOSE M. CRUZ, SJ, PhD
Dean
School of Social Sciences

Grade: Excellent

Date: 11 February 2003

 iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I have so many people to thank who have helped me in this journey. I am grateful to my

adviser and mentor, Dr. Cristina Jayme Montiel for showing me the wonders of research. I

thank my practicum adviser, Dr. Anna Miren Gonzalez-Intal, for suggesting this interesting

topic and Dr. Patricia B. Licuanan for inspiring me to pursue my interest in gender. I also

thank my other panel members Dr. Alma de la Cruz, Dr. Allen Tan, and Dr. Isabel Melgar for

their valuable comments.

I am especially grateful to Kashmir Sheerin Castillo, my very reliable research assistant. I

also thank the following who helped me in distributing the survey forms: Aileen Castillo,

Raymond Cosare, Mayumi Damanico, Barbara David, Peter Emata, Francis Mercado,

Kenneth Nerecina, Jocelyn Nolasco, Mira Ofreneo, Regina Reyes, and Lizabeth Sanchez. I

also express my gratitude to all the respondents and interviewees.

I am indebted to the Ateneo Faculty Development Program and Peace Psychology Funds

for the financial support. I also thank all my coteachers, friends, and students at the

Psychology Department, especially Fr. Jaime Bulatao, SJ, Susan, Annette, and Elma for the

moral and emotional support. Special thanks go to Ma’am Alma and Nitz for helping me in

style reading.

I dedicate this dissertation to my loving husband, JC Mercado, my children, Angela and

Matthew, and my parents, Arthur and Mariter Macapagal. Thank you so much for believing in

me and inspiring me to reach great heights.

 v

ABSTRACT

The study investigated the influences of respondent-gender, respondent-social class,

politician-gender, and position of political candidate on perceived traits and governance-

abilities of political candidates. The survey used a 2 X 3 X 2 X 2 factorial design covering 536

respondents aged 18 to 35 years old. The 12 interviews provided a more in-depth approach to

the research questions. The respondents were asked to rate a hypothetical political candidate

who was either a male or female mayor, or male or female president using a Shah scale and a

Likert-type attitude scale. Research results show that the females and respondents from the

lower social classes showed a more favorable perception of politicians. The current study has

also shown that men and women political candidates are perceived as having different traits

and governance-abilities. The interviewees reported their preference for a male mayor but said

both male and females can be good presidents. Findings also show that females and E

respondents tend to view female politicians more positively whereas the males and ABC and

D respondents believed that it is the male politician who can do a better job. The implications

of the findings for construal research, voter education, consciousness-raising, and political

campaign strategies are discussed.

 vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1

Statement of the Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Review of Related Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Gender Differences in Political Attitude and Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Political information and interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Political participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Women in politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Gender socialization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Structural and situational factors in gender differences . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Social Class Differences in Elections and Governance-Abilities
Ratings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Voters’ Evaluation of Political Candidates’ Traits and Governance-
Abilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Attitude Toward Women and Men Political Candidates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Perceived traits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Gender bias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Perceived governance-abilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Attitude Toward Politicians at Varied Positions of Office . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Social Role Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Identity Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Symbolic Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

II. METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Interviews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
 vii

Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ….. . . . . . . . . . 37
Shah Scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Construction of the Shah scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Scoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Reliability and validity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 40
Semantic differential dimensions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 40
Governance-Abilities Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Interview Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Pretest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Actual Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

III. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Survey Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Perceived Traits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Overall Perceived Traits of Politicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Respondent’s Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Social Status of Respondent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Gender of Politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Position of Politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Interaction Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Gender of politician X gender of respondent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Gender of politician X SES of respondent X gender of respondent . 51
Summary of Results for Perceived Traits of Political Candidates . . . . . . 55
Perceived Governance-Abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Overall Perceived Governance- Abilities Scores. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Gender of Respondent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
SES of Respondent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Gender of Politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Position of Politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Interaction Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Gender of politician and SES of respondent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Respondent’s SES X position of politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Gender of politician X gender of respondent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
SES X politician’s gender X position of politician . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Gender of politician X position X gender of respondent . . . . . . . . . 66
SES X politician’s gender X position of politician X
respondent’s gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
 viii

Summary of Results for Governance-Abilities of Political

Candidates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
In-Depth Interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Respondent-Gender Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Respondent-Social Class Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Gender of Politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 70
Male politicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 70
Female politicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Position of the Politician. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Position and Gender of Politician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Mayor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
President. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Summary of In-Depth Interview Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

IV. DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Perceived Character Traits of Political Candidates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Perceived Governance-Abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Respondent Gender Difference in Perceived Traits and Governance-
Abilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Social Class Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Gender of Politician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Position of Political Candidate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Politician’s Gender and Politician’s Position Interaction Effect. . . . . . . 93
Respondent’s Gender and Politician’s Gender Interaction Effect. . . . . . 96
Respondent’s Social Class and Politician’s Gender Interaction Effect . 99
Respondent’s Gender X Respondent’s SES X
Politician’s Gender Interaction Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Limitations of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
 ix

APPENDIXES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

A. Number of Women Senators and Congresswomen From Commission on

Elections (COMELEC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

B. Number and Percentage of Women Candidates in Recent Elections

From Commission on Elections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

C. Number of Women in Elected Local Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

D. Occupations by Socioeconomic Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

E. Pretest Questionnaire of Shah Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

F. Questionnaire to Determine Semantic Differential Dimensions

of Shah Scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

G. Final Shah Scale. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

H . Interview Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

I. Politicians Mentioned in Interview Corresponding to Character Traits . . . . 131

J. Politicians Mentioned in Interview Corresponding to

Governance-Abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
 x

LIST OF TABLES

Page

1. The Cells of the Factorial Experiment and Their Corresponding

Sample Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

2. Traits in the Final Shah Scale With Their Corresponding Mean Likeability
Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

3. Traits of Shah Scale Categorized by Evaluation, Potency, and Activity . . . . 41

4. Frequency Table of Perceived Traits of Political Candidates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

5. Analysis of Variance of Perceived Traits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

6. Means of Perceived Traits of Gender of Politician, SES, and

Gender of Respondent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

7. Means and Standard Deviation of Perceived Governance-Abilities of

Political Candidates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

8. Analysis of Variance of Perceived Governance-Abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

9. Mean Scores of Perceived Governance-Abilities Based on SES of

Respondent’s Gender and Gender of Politician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

10. Significant Interaction Effects of Governance-Abilities.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

 xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

1. Conceptual framework of the study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

2. Male and female respondents’ perceived traits of male and

female politicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

3. Female respondents from ABC, D, and E social classes and their

perceived traits of male and female politicians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

4. Male respondents from ABC, D, and E social classes and their perceived
traits of male and female politicians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

5. Interaction effect of gender of politician and SES of respondent on

governance-abilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
 THESIS/DISSERTATION PROCEDURE/REQUIREMENTS

Procedure Office Comments/ Requirements

Submission of Revised Thesis
Student does steps 1 to 8. All work for the degree must be completed
Beginning SY 2002-2003, only students who within 5 years from the date of the first
have completed all requirements for the degree registration for the degree.
may join the graduation ceremony.

1) Clears revised copy of thesis with the Thesis Department Student submits letter addressed to Dept.
Adviser , Style Reader, and Dept. Chairperson. Chairperson together with a copy of the revised
thesis. Upon approval by the Dept. Chairperson,
student pays the basic registration fee, and/or
Late Thesis/Dissertation Clearing Fee, depending
on when oral defense was passed.*
2) Clears revised copy of thesis with OGS Details:
OGS for format of front matter in general & Name of Student
details. Degree
Title of Thesis
Date of Oral Defense
Grade in the Oral Defense
Names of Thesis Adviser and
Panel Members
Details should be consistent w/ records.
3) Obtains thesis paper (optional) and copy of Registrar Thesis paper is P350 per ream of 500 sheets.
Thesis Abstract format. Note: Student must observe 1 inch margin on
all sides.
4) Prints cleared thesis on thesis paper - 1 set Thesis paper is optional.
and prepares Thesis Abstract.
5) Makes 3 photocopies. Original + 3 photocopies = 4
Orig-Library, 2-Archives, 3-Department,
(If student wants additional copies, prepare 4-Registrar (This is student's copy after
written request to be endorsed by the Registrar has prepared certification.)
Chairperson. Submit this to OGS.)
6) Prints Approval Pages (3 to 4 copies each) Signatures must be complete before
and has these signed. submitting to OGS for binding.
a. Approval Sheet for Defense signed by Adviser,
Chairperson, & Dean.(4 copies)
b. Approval Sheet for Acceptance of the
Thesis signed by the Adviser, Panel
Members, and Dean.(4 copies)
c. Approval Sheet for Style signed by the
Style Reader.(3 copies)
 Procedure Office Comments/ Requirements

7) Submits the following to OGS: OGS Binding Fee as of July 2002 (using bookcloth)
a. Thesis (Orig & 3 photocopies) - about P1 per page per copy; min. charge is
b. Abstract (Orig. & 3 photocopies) P180 per copy.
c. Approval Pages (3 to 4 copies each; - add P10 per line per copy for titles exceeding
all original signed) 2 lines (inverted pyramid format)
d. Binding Fee Normal processing: 4 days to 1 week
e. Soft copy (as required by the department) Processing can take as long as 2 months or
more during peak periods e.g.March submission.
(Binding c/o Albert/Mang Badong Garcia)

8) Fills up information sheet for the graduation OGS To update contact information.
ceremony (for those who defended their thesis
from SY 2002-2003 onwards.)
9) OGS submits bound theses copies OGS
(CHED and/or Registrar, Library, Archives, Registrar
Department) Library
Archives
Department
For thesis submitted on or near the II Sem OGS (To be included in list of Candidates for
cut-off date for inclusion in the Graduation Registrar Graduation in the Programme, student must
Programme, OGS gives clearance to Registrar. submit revised thesis etc. about 2 weeks before
(Registrar submits list to VP-LS) the commencement date in March.)
10) Graduates who will need certification from Registrar One week for normal processing.
the Registrar do the following: Cashier No processing one week before and during
a. Go to Registrar's Office to get form. regular registration period. Students may
b. Fill up form and have this signed by get copies 3 weeks after regular registration
Registrar. period.
c. Clear with Accounting Office.
c. Pay P25 to Cashier.
11) Student applies for clearance and official Registrar One week for normal processing.
copies of transcript of records, certifcate of Cashier No processing one week before and during
graduation and/or diploma. Also regular registration period. Students may
obtains Student's bound copy of thesis. (for get copies 3 weeks after regular registration
those who defended their thesis after II Sem period.
SY 2001-2002) Transcript - P25/page

Note: 1) Amounts are subject to change without prior notice.

2) The Registrar's Office is located at the 2nd Floor, Bellarmine Hall.
3) The Office of Graduate Services, Accounting Office, and the Cashier are located at the
Ground Floor, Xavier Hall.
4) Departments/Programs may have other/additional requirements.
5) Student has to take note of the following guidelines on thesis submission:

Oral Defense Passed Beginning I Sem I Sem SY 2002-2003 Before

Procedure after SY 2003-2004 To Summer 2003 SY 2002-2003
written request for thesis
clearing is approved by
Chairperson
Within oral defense term No additional procedures NA NA
required
Within 1 year after oral During the registration No additional procedures NA
defense term period, get registration form required
and register for Submit
200/Submit 400. Pay basic
registration fee.
After the one year period During the registration Pay Late Thesis / NA
but not to exceed 3 years period, student registers for Dissertation Clearing Fee
for the master’s and 5 Submit 200/Submit 400 and per term that the thesis is
year’s for the Ph.D.after the pays basic registration and being reviewed/processed
oral defense term Late Thesis / Dissertation by the Department.
Clearing Fee per term that
the thesis is being
reviewed/processed by the
Department.
NA NA All students will have to pay
Late Thesis / Dissertation
Clearing Fee per term that
the thesis is being
reviewed/processed by the
Department.