The sex difference in self-assessed fears

Although the greater self-attribution of fear among females than males is well established, limited empirical information is available to explain this difference. This study assessed the contribution of Adjective Check List measures of masculinity and femininity plus the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale to the prediction of self-ratings of fear. Significant sex differences were found for self-rated fears and for masculinity and femininity scales of the Adjective Check List. In separate analyses for males and females only the femininity measure was significantly correlated with fear scores. For males, the multiple correlation of the independent variables with the fear measure accounted for approximately 10% of the variance, while for females approximately 28% of the variance was predicted.A version of this paper was presented at the Southern Society for Philosophy and Psychology, March 1978.     

A critical appraisal of the PRF ANDRO scale

A factor analysis of the PRF ANDRO reveals a structure reflecting the PRF scales from which the items came. It is argued that there is little value in combining a conglomeration of items from different Personality Research Form scales as has been done with the MASCUL and FEMIN scales of the PRF ANDRO. Rather, relevant intact PRF scales should be considered as separate predictors, for example in regression equations. Alternatively, if single scales are required to represent masculinity and femininity, it is suggested that PRF dominance and nurturance, the scales from which MASCUL and FEMIN draw a plurality of their items respectively, are more suitable than the two PRF ANDRO scales. These latter scales are less internally consistent and show less convergence with other sex-role scales than PRF dominance and nurturance.     

A critical appraisal of the PRF ANDRO scale

A factor analysis of the PRF ANDRO reveals a structure reflecting the PRF scales from which the items came. It is argued that there is little value in combining a conglomeration of items from different Personality. Research Form scales as has been done with the MASCUL and FEMIN scales of the PRF ANDRO. Rather, relevant intact PRF scales should be considered as separate predictors, for example in regression equations. Al ternati vely, if single scales are required to represent masculinity and femininity, it is suggested that PRF dominance and nurturance, the scales from which MASCUL and FEMIN draw a plurality of their items respectively, are more suitable than the two PRF ANDRO scales. These latter scales are less internally consistent and show less convergence with other sex-role scales than PRF dominance and nurturance.     

a comparison of the Bem Sex Role Inventory and the PRF ANDRO Scale

The Bem Sex Role Inventory and the PRF ANDRO Scales were administered to 158 (59 males, 99 females) undergraduates enrolled in an introductory psychology course. Data analysis was carried out by examining the amount of agreement between the BSRI and the PRF ANDRO Scale in terms of assignment of sex-role outcome. When both sexes are combined, only 66 of 158 (42%) subjects fell in the same sex-role category.     

Research on individual differences requires correlational analysis,not ANOVA

The data of Welsh and Baucom (1977) have been reanalyzed using correlational analysis for the complete distributions in place of the analysis of variance of extreme groups. The analysis reveals a number of statistically significant correlations between composites of M-F scales and several measures of intelligence, but these are trival in size. Also the sign of the correlations depends directly on which M-F scales are selected to form composites. One can obtain a correlation between either masculinity and intelligence or femininity and intelligence depending on whether the supposed trait is measured from scales formed from the Adjective Check List or from a combination of the MMPI and the SVIB.     

A Multitrait Multimethod Measurement Approach to the Traits (or States) of Anxiety,Depression and Hostility

This study tested the convergent and discriminant validities of various psychological techniques used for the measurement of the affects of anxiety, depression and hostility. The subjects were 29 psychiatric patients and 25 normal controls, all males. Subjects were interviewed and rated for the three affects and given an extensive battery of tests. Anxiety and depression measures from ratings, checklists, and questionnaires demonstrated good convergent validity but poor discriminant validity. The projective methods did not demonstrate much convergent validity. Hostility was separable from anxiety and depression but the tests showed poor convergent validity for hostility. In the normals, fantasy hostility (TAT) and admitted hostility (Multiple Affect Adjective Check List) showed some convergence, but in the patients there was no congruence between these two levels.     

Development and Validation of an Adjective Check List to Assess the Millon Personality Types in a Normal Population

A 405-item experimental Personality Adjective Check List (PACL) was refined into a 153-item form to assess the personality types outlined by Millon (1969, 1981) in a normal population. Scale construction and validation followed a method outlined by Loevinger (1957, 1972). Nine scales were developed based on the responses of 459 men and women, one for each of Milton's eight basic personalities plus an Experimental scale measuring aspects of his three more severe types. Extensive reliability and validity analyses were conducted involving over 2,200 men and women from across the United States, including a factor analysis of scales. These revealed good internal consistency for each scale, good test-retest reliability over a 3-month period, adequate factor structure, and good convergent and discriminant validity based on self-report data. Results indicated that Millon's basic types exist in normal form much as they are postulated to exist as disorders. Research efforts focusing on Millon's theory as it applies to normals may bring a more complete understanding of the entire spectrum of personality.     

Development and validation of an adjective check list to assess the Millon personality types in a normal population

A 405-item experimental Personality Adjective Check List (PACL) was refined into a 153-item form to assess the personality types outlined by Millon (1969, 1981) in a normal population. Scale construction and validation followed a method outlined by Loevinger (1957, 1972). Nine scales were developed based on the responses of 459 men and women, one for each of Millon's eight basic personalities plus an Experimental scale measuring aspects of his three more severe types. Extensive reliability and validity analyses were conducted involving over 2,200 men and women from across the United States, including a factor analysis of scales. These revealed good internal consistency for each scale, good test-retest reliability over a 3-month period, adequate factor structure, and good convergent and discriminant validity based on self-report data. Results indicated that Millon's basic types exist in normal form much as they are postulated to exist as disorders. Research efforts focusing on Millon's theory as it applies to normals may bring a more complete understanding of the entire spectrum of personality.     

A further validation of the bem sex role inventory: A multitrait-multimethod study

The present study used a multitrait-multimethod technique [D.T. Campbell and D. W. Fiske (1959) “Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix,” Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105] to examine Bem's [(1974) “The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 152–162] use of an instrumental-expressive dichotomy to conceptualize the Masculinity and Femininity scales of the Bem Sex Role Inventory as statistically orthogonal constructs. Results indicate that while perhaps reliable, masculinity and femininity lack clear convergent and discriminant validity. Therefore, Bem's contention that masculinity and femininity are orthogonal constructs is questioned. Results are discussed in light of trait- vs. method-driven research.     

Masculinity and femininity: The role of desirability in the relationships among measures based on self-concept and personality traits

With data gathered from 96 female college students, intercorrelations were examined among self-concept ratings of masculinity and femininity, and scales from two personality-trait measures of masculinity and femininity—the Adjective Check List (ACL) and the Extended Personal Attributes Questionnaire (EPAQ). The sign and magnitude of the correlations between pairs of measures were successfully predicted on the basis of the congruence between measures of both the gender relevance and the desirability of the self-rated traits comprising each measure. The desirability of the trait items employed in self-report personality-trait scales of masculinity and femininity evidently introduces methods variance that can either inhibit or potentiate the relationship with other scales composed predominantly of either desirable or undesirable traits. When balanced for the desirability of trait items, personality-trait scores of masculinity and femininity were substantially inversely correlated with each other, and only marginally correlated with self-concept ratings of masculinity and femininity, but these correlations remained in the anticipated directions. This result is consistent with the findings of Pedhazur and Tetenbaum (“Bem Sex Role Inventory: A Theoretical and Methodological Critique,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 996–1016), and supports Spence's (Masculinity, Femininity, and Gender-Related Traits: A Conceptual Analysis and Critique of Current Research,” In B. A. Maher and W. B. Maher (Eds.), Progress in Experimental Research, Vol. XIII, Normal Personality Processes, New York: Academic Press, 1984) position that personality traits should be viewed as only one of many possible referents for gender/sex role identity.     

Gender schema theory and sex role inventories: some conceptual and psychometric considerations

In this study we assessed whether the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) and the PRF ANDRO are appropriate for investigations of gender schema theory (Bem, 1981a). Because these instruments were developed for entirely different theoretical purposes, it is important to empirically examine the validity of these measures for investigating the construct of gender schema. On the basis of the propositions of gender schema theory, we made several predictions about the psychometric properties that should be exhibited by a valid measure of this construct. Responses to the PRF ANDRO and the BSRI were factor analyzed separately for sex-typed and non-sex-typed groups. Results show consistent and theoretically predictable differences in the factor solutions of these two groups. The sex-typed or gender-schematic group obtained bipolar factors, with masculine items loading with one sign, whereas feminine items loaded with the other sign on each factor. Also, sex of subject loaded highly on almost every factor for this group. The non-sex-typed group, however, obtained few such distinctly dichotomous factors, and sex of subject loaded only on the weaker factors. Results are interpreted as providing support for the construct validity of at least the BSRI and the PRF ANDRO for use in researching the implications of this approach.     

Assessment of creativity with the ACL: An empirical comparison of four scales

Several scales have been developed from the Adjective Check List to assess creativity, with almost no comparative data to evaluate them. In this study, two samples, one of research scientists and one of advanced architecture students, were assessed using the A CL scored for the Domino, Gough, Schaefer, and Yarnell scales of creativity. The results indicated a fair amount of equivalence among the four scales, with a tendency for the Domino and the Gough scales to have better convergent and discriminant validity.     

Negative attributes are gendered too: Conceptualizing and measuring positive and negative facets of sex‐role identity

Measures of gender identity have almost exclusively relied on positive aspects of masculinity and femininity, although conceptually the self‐concept is not limited to positive attributes. A theoretical argument is made for considering negative attributes of gender identity, followed by five studies developing the Positive–Negative Sex‐Role Inventory (PN‐SRI) as a new measure of gender identity. Study 1 demonstrated that many of the attributes of a German version of the Bem Sex‐Role Inventory are no longer considered to differ in desirability for men and women. For the PN‐SRI, Study 2 elicited attributes characterizing men and women in today's society, for which ratings of typicality and desirability as well as self‐ratings by men and women were obtained in Study 3. Study 4 examined the reliability and factorial structure of the four subscales of positive and negative masculinity and femininity and demonstrated the construct and discriminant validity of the PN‐SRI by showing that the negative masculinity and femininity scales were unique predictors of select validation constructs. Study 5 showed that the new instrument explained variance in the validation constructs beyond earlier measures of gender identity. Key message: Even in the construction of negative aspects of gender identity, individuals prefer gender‐congruent attributes. Negative masculinity and femininity make a unique contribution to understanding gender‐related differences in psychological outcome variables. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Masculinity and femininity as factors in feminism

The relationship between feminism and sex roles was explored in two studies. In female college students, sex-role types were measured by Baucom's (1976) MSC and FMN scales and by Bem's Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974). Feminism was measured by the Attitude Toward Women Scale (AWS, Short Form) (Spence & Helmreich, 1972) and the Women's Liberation Scale (WLS) (Goldberg, 1976). Two groups of women were predicted to be more profeminist than others. (a) those scoring high on both masculinity and femininity and (b) those scoring high on masculinity and low on femininity. Results of the study supported both hypotheses using the AWS but not the WLS. In the second study, MSC and FMN served as the basis for forming sex-role types, and feminism was measured by participation in NOW. Again, a large number of women high on masculinity and low on femininity were feminists: however, women high on both masculinity and femininity were underrepresented in NOW. Different results in the two studies are discussed in terms of the different ways that feminism was measured.     

Masculinity, Femininity, and Marital Satisfaction: An Examination of Theoretical Models

ABSTRACT This study sought to investigate the relationship between masculinity, femininity, and marital satisfaction. A number of polynomial multiple regression analyses were performed in an effort to determine the validity of six theoretical models linking sex roles to marital satisfaction. These are the femininity model, masculinity model, sex-typed model, additive androgynous model, interactive androgynous model, and curvilinear model. The sample was composed of 117 couples who completed the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974) and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1976). For men, the results showed that marital satisfaction was related to (a) their self-described levels of femininity and masculinity, (b) the level of self-described femininity of their wives, and (c) the presence of feminine qualities as well as a limited optimal level of masculine qualities which they perceived in their wives. For women, marital satisfaction was associated with (a) the number of self-described feminine qualities and (b) the level of masculinity, as well as an optimal level of femininity, which they perceived in their husbands. Further-more, small actual-ideal discrepancies in levels of masculinity and femininity ascribed to partners constituted reliable predictors of marital satisfaction for both men and women.     

Reliability and validity of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List - Revised

A recent factor analysis of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List (MAACL) changed the Anxiety, Depression, and Hostility scales from bipolar to unipolar scales and added two new scales: Positive Affect and Sensation Seeking. Internal reliability of the MAACL-R scales, computed for normal and patient samples, was adequate for state and trait forms except for Sensation Seeking. Test-retest reliability in college students was higher for the trait form with retest intervals of from 2 to 8 weeks than for the state form with retest intervals of from 2 to 5 days. The pattern of correlations among self-, peer, and counselor ratings and the MAACL-R scales for normal and patient samples indicates improved discriminant validity and equally good convergent validity as the old scales. The use of standard scores that are indexed to the number of items checked reduced scale intercorrelations by controlling the acquiescence set.The financial support of the Weldon Springs Endowment Fund, University of Missouri at Kansas City, toward the completion of this research project is gratefully acknowledged.     

Sex role conformity in homosexual and heterosexual males

Nine principal components were extracted from the scores of 26 homosexual and 26 heterosexual males matched on age, education, occupation status, and sampling frame on Adjective Check List, Bem Sex Role Inventory, Chapin Social Insight Test, Experience Inventory, and Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire scales selected to represent a variety of "masculine" and "feminine" sex role attributes. The four most general varimax factors, accounting for 48% of the total variance, were: I) "Feminine Openness," II) "Masculine Boldness," III) "Reflection," and IV) "Novelty Seeking." Factor scores were constructed and indicated that the homosexual sample was significantly more identified with Factor I (p < .00l; 17% of total variance). There was no significant difference between the samples on Factor II, nor on the remaining two general factors which were not sex typed.     

Additional study of the Youth-Depression Adjective Check List

Replicated and extended aspects of determinations of reliability and validity for the State version of the Youth-Depression Adjective Check List. Students from Grades 9 through 12 (64 girls and 41 boys) completed the State version and the Adolescent Activities Checklist on each of 12 consecutive days and completed the Trait version, the Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale, the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List--Revised Grade 6, and the Adolescent Activities Checklist at the beginning and the end of the study. Good reliability and validity of the State version were confirmed and extended, and preliminary information on characteristics of the Trait version of the Youth-Depression Adjective Check List also was presented. The State version seems suitable for use in research with adolescents and preadolescents. More study of the Trait version is recommended.     

Androgyny and creativity: a study of the relationship between a balanced sex-role and creative functioning

The relationship between creativity and androgyny was studied in 163 women and men with the Creative Functioning Test (CFT) and the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). A 2 (femininity: high/low) x 2 (masculinity: high/low) x 2 (sex) ANOVA was conducted on subjects' CFT scores. A significant interaction effect between femininity and masculinity was found showing that subjects high on both femininity and masculinity (androgynous) and low on both scales (undifferentiated) reached higher CFT scores than female-typed and male-typed subjects. Further, a significant three-way interaction including sex of subject indicated that the former two-way interaction was accounted for by men only.     

Homosexual and heterosexual sex-role orientation on six sex-role scales

A comparison was made of the sex roles of homosexual and heterosexual men and women on the Bem Sex Role Inventory, Personality Attributes Questionnaire, Personality Research Form Androgyny Scale, Adjective Checklist Masculinity and Femininity Scales, Extended Personality Attributes Questionnaire and Undesirable Characteristics Scale. The results indicated that homosexuals and heterosexuals differ in their response to different aspects of sex roles. The most consistent difference was the greater femininity of male homosexuals in respect to male heterosexuals. Other differences were scale-specific and the low interscale comparability indicated such scales should not be used interchangeably. Differences between results of studies comparing sex roles of the homosexuals and heterosexuals appear attributable to sample heterogeneity and distinctions between sex-role scales.