The relationship between masculine gender role stress and psychological adjustment: A question of construct validity?

Masculine gender role stress is a theoretical construct that describes the stress created in men when they feel they are not meeting society's expectations for masculinity, or when the situation forces men to act in feminine-typed ways. The stress produced by these feelings or actions are thought to be related to negative psychological outcomes for men, but should be unrelated to well-being for women. The present study investigated the validity of the masculine gender role stress construct, especially with regard to the assumption that masculine gender role stress is related to negative psychological outcomes for men more than for women. Participants were a group of mostly Caucasian undergraduates. Results indicated that masculine gender role stress was related to depression, hostility, and anxiety, but to the same degree for both men and women. These findings suggest that, if MGRS is a valid construct, then researchers need to explore other ways in which this type of stress can negatively affect men, but not women.     

The impact of social roles on trait judgments: a critical reexamination

Consistent with social role theory's assumption that the role behavior of men and women shapes gender stereotypes, earlier experiments have found that men's and women's occupancy of the same role eliminated gender-stereotypical judgments of greater agency and lower communion in men than women. The shifting standards model raises the question of whether a shift to within-sex standards in judgments of men and women in roles could have masked underlying gender stereotypes. To examine this possibility, two experiments obtained judgments of men and women using measures that do or do not restrain shifts to within-sex standards. This measure variation did not affect the social role pattern of smaller perceived sex differences in the presence of role information. These findings thus support the social role theory claim that designations of identical roles for subgroups of men and women eliminate or reduce perceived sex differences.     

Masculine gender-role stress: predictor of anger, anxiety, and health-risk behaviors

We suggest that male gender-role identification affects whether specific situations are appraised as stressful. A questionnaire was developed to measure masculine gender-role stress (MGRS). Correlational data and multiple regression were used to validate the MGRS scale as a measure of gender-related stress in men, and compare its predictive utility with Spence's commonly-used measure of masculinity. Findings indicate that stress appraisal is gender related, that is, men experience more masculine-role stress than women. Further, the construct of MGRS was distinguished from the concept of masculinity. Finally, MGRS predicted increased anger, increased anxiety, and poorer health behaviors.     

Automatic Associations and Conscious Attitudes Predict Different Aspects of Men’s Intimate Partner Violence and Sexual Harassment Proclivities

Intimate partner violence against women (IPV) and sexual harassment are both widespread. Research on their causes and attitudinal correlates has rarely examined implicit, automatic cognitive associations related to the partner (in IPV aggressors) or to women (in sexual harassment offenders). The aim of the present research was to study these implicit associations in 129 male German students. Participants completed scales of hostile sexism (HS), masculine gender role stress (MGRS), short-term (STMO) and long-term mating orientation (LTMO), and proclivity to both IPV and sexual harassment. Next they performed a primed lexical decision task that measured whether concepts of violence, power, hostility, and sexuality were differentially associated with representations of women, men, and the participant’s own intimate partner. Results showed that implicit associations of own partner with violence as well as hostility were generally high but did not correlate strongly with the proclivity measures. Furthermore, the proclivity measures were positively predicted by HS, MGRS, and STMO, whereas LTMO negatively predicted IPV proclivity. Practice implications point to the need to address early socialization processes that may shape men’s negative associations with female partners. Some strategies to prevent and reduce these types of implicit associations are discussed.

     

Stereotypic and nonstereotypic sex role trait and behavior orientations, gender identity, and psychological adjustment

This study examines the relations among sex role trait and behavior orientations, gender identity, and psychological adjustment in order to test traditional and contemporary perspectives regarding the adjustment implications of stereotypic and nonstereotypic sex role trait and behavior orientations. Measures of sex role personality traits and behaviors and scales assessing depression, anxiety, and social maladjustment were administered to 235 college men and women. In addition, subjects completed measures of gender identity and gender adequacy. Contrary to traditional perspectives, androgynous men and women and cross-sex-typed women were no less well adjusted than sex-typed individuals. However, consistent with traditional perspectives, men who were low in masculine characteristics (and men and women low in both masculine and feminine characteristics) did appear less well adjusted on measures of depression, anxiety, and social maladjustment. Furthermore, low masculinity men had less secure gender identities. No such gender identity disturbances were found in women.     

Sex role identity in young adults: its parental antecedents and relation to ego development

This study, inspired by Block's (1973) work, was designed to enable one to examine how ego development and socialization experience interact in relation to sex role identity. Sex role identity was measured via the Bem Sex Role Inventory, and socialization practices were measured via the Block Child-Rearing Practices Report. Both measures were scaled so as to yield scores on agency, communion, and androgyny. Ego development was assessed via Loevinger's Sentence Completion Test of Ego Development. The sample consisted of 120 young adult men and women, married and single. Analyses revealed that the predictive power of the variables differed by sex. Ego development was predictive of sex role identity in men but not women, whereas socialization practices were predictive of sex role identity in women but not men. The results were seen as supporting Chodorow's (1974) position regarding the differing socialization experiences of men and women.     

Men’s Experience of Psychological Abuse: Conceptualization and Measurement Issues

In this paper the literature on men’s experience of psychological abuse (in the U.S.) is reviewed and the ability to conceptualize and measure such abuse is reconsidered. Scales used to measure psychological abuse based on the experiences of battered women are critiqued as inadequate as measures of psychological abuse of men. Although both men and women direct psychological abuse toward their partners, violence perpetrated by men and women is not necessarily the same. Adopting a gender role perspective on psychological abuse, we argue that women may use different strategies to hurt men including manipulation and gender role harassment, whereas coercive control paired with physical abuse may constitute one version of (male) intimate partner violence.     

On the Content and Structure of the Gender Role Self-Concept: Including Gender-Stereotypical Behaviors in Addition to Traits

The present study introduces a conceptualization of gender role self-concept that implies not only the commonly measured socially desirable expressive and instrumental traits (F+ and M+) but also feminine and masculine behaviors (FBehav and MBehav), and socially undesirable gender traits (F− and M−). Three different models were tested using structural equation modeling. For both men and women, F+ and FBehav load together on one dimension whereas M+ and MBehav load on a second dimension. F− and M− are conceptualized as independent dimensions that are mainly related to the cross-gendered latent factor. With the exception of these similarities, the self-concepts of men and women differed in several important aspects that point to a different meaning of gender roles for the two sexes.     

Gender differences and similarities in sex and love

One's attitudes toward love and sexuality are influenced by many factors, including gender. To explore the role of gender (and other variables) in participants' attitudinal orientations toward love and sexuality, data were collected in the United States at three time points (1988, 1992, 1993), resulting in a total sample of 1,090 participants. Data analyses showed gender differences in both sexual attitudes and love. Men were more sexually permissive than women (consistent with previous research), although women and men similarly endorsed other aspects of sexuality, including sex as an emotional experience. Men and women differed on several relationship variables (e.g., women were more oriented to friendship-based love, and men to game-playing love). However, correlational analyses showed many similar patterns for women and men. These findings underline the need to consider both gender differences and similarities in sex and love within intimate relationships.     

Sex role self schema and psychological adjustment in coupled homosexual and heterosexual men and women

This study examined the relation between dimensions of sex role self schema (assessed by four factor scores of the Bem Sex Role Inventory: Instrumentality, Expressiveness, Autonomy, and Masculinity-Femininity) and psychological adjustment (assessed by the Symptom Checklist-90-R) in 366 homosexuals (230 males and 136 females) and 241 heterosexuals (124 males and 117 females). All subjects were in a cohabitating relationship. Homosexuals and heterosexuals did not differ in psychological adjustment, but men were found to be more distressed by paranoid symptoms than women. Dimensions of sex role self schema varied by an interaction between gender and sexual orientation. Gender differences on Instrumentality, Expressiveness, and Masculinity-Femininity were more pronounced for heterosexuals than for homosexuals. Further, homosexual women were more Instrumental than heterosexual women, while homosexual and heterosexual men were equivalent; homosexual men were more Expressive than heterosexual men, while homosexual and heterosexual women were equivalent; and the discrepancy between homosexual and heterosexual women's Masculinity-Femininity score was greater than that between homosexual and heterosexual men. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that only education and the Autonomy dimension of sex role self scheme were the best nonredundant predictors of psychological adjustment, although the relations were weak. Findings are discussed in terms of current theory and research on sex role self schemas.     

Stigma,Disclosure and Relationship Agency in Black Women’s Sexual Relationships with Behaviorally Bisexual Black Men

The health needs and relationships of Black women partnered with behaviorally bisexual Black men are under addressed in the public health literature. This paper explores the relationship dynamics of Black women’s sexual relationships with behaviorally bisexual Black men. We conducted thirty qualitative interviews with a group of HIV negative and HIV positive women partnered with behaviorally bisexual Black men in the San Francisco Bay Area. Women took part in a one-time qualitative interview that addressed relationships, bisexual partners, sexuality, HIV risk behaviors, and disclosure. Women described experiences of their own and their partner’s experiences of disclosure and sexual stigma, along with structural racism and masculine cultural norms that contribute to men’s non-disclosure of sex with men. The paper identifies the ways in which disclosure and stigma are experienced by a sample of women in relationships with behaviorally bisexual Black male partners, pointing to the ways in which these women demonstrate sexual agency in these relationships. These sexual narratives emphasize the ways in which Black women are at once agentic and also navigate gendered vulnerability in their relationships with bisexual men. These findings of Black women’s sexual agency present a call to develop health interventions resonant with Black women’s relationship experiences and structures of bisexual relationships.     

Qualitative and quantitative sex differences in self-reported aggressive behavioral characteristics

Aggressive behavioral characteristics were assessed in a large group of men and women by a self-report instrument, the Aggression Inventory. Significant gender differences appeared on four factors in which men reported more physical aggression and verbal aggression than did women. Further, men had higher scores on measures of impulsiveness and lack of patience than women, while women reported being more likely to avoid confrontation. In addition to these quantitative sex differences in self-reported behavior, factor analyses indicated qualitative differences by sex, wherein most of the variance for women centered on verbal aggression, while physical aggression was the first factor for men.     

Sex and sex role effects on achievement strivings: Dimensions of similarity and difference

Models of gender differences in achievement were examined to explore their accuracy and redundancy Self-reports of successes and failures of females and males were content analyzed The eight dimensions postulated by Bakan (1966, agentic-communal), Stem and Bailey (1973, task-social), Kipins (1974, other-directed, inner-directed), and Veroff (1977, impact-process) were collapsed into only two dimensions using factor analysis A domain dimension was used to consider the task (agentic) vs social (communal) nature of the achievement activities that were undertaken A performance evaluation dimension referred to whether people used intrinsic (inner-directed, process) or extrinsic (other-directed, impact) factors in evaluating their performance Analyses using measures of sex role identification, and the stereotypic masculinity or femininity of subjects’ achievements suggested (1) Sex role stereotypes are intimately related to the domains of achievement goals, however, women and men did not differ in the kinds of activities (domains) that they reported, and (2) women (intrinsic) and men (extrinsic) differed in how they defined success and failure, but these performance evaluation styles were not strongly related to sex role identification     

Cross-cultural validity of the masculine and feminine gender role stress scales

The objective was to examine the usefulness of Dutch versions of the Masculine Gender Role Stress (MGRS; Eisler & Skidmore, 1987) Scale and the Feminine Gender Role Stress (Gillespie & Eisler, 1992) Scale in The Netherlands. Undergraduate students (N = 2,239) completed both gender role stress scales. A subgroup (n = 508) also completed questionnaires about masculinity-femininity and daily hassles. With regard to both gender role stress scales, results of confirmatory factor analyses supported the original 5-factor structures and revealed no cross-sex differences on the factor models. Reliability and homogeneity indexes were all well within acceptable to satisfactory limits. Further evidence of construct validity was found in (a) medium to large correlations with daily hassles, (b) sex differences on the FGRS scale, and (c) small to medium correlations with masculinity-femininity. The major discrepancy with previous studies was that for Dutch female and male students, the MGRS scale was not sex specific. Taken together, this study sustained the utility of both gender role stress scales for use in The Netherlands.     

Psychological Similarities and Differences between Women and Men across Cultures

Most research looking at psychological similarities and differences between women and men has been carried out in North America and Western Europe. In this paper, I review a body of cross‐cultural evidence showing that it is precisely in these Western countries that women and men differ the most in terms of personality, self‐construal, values, or emotions. Much less‐pronounced gender differences are observed, if at all, in Asian and African countries. These findings are unexpected from the perspectives of the two most influential frameworks applied to sex differences coming from evolutionary psychology and social role theory. However, recent research related to social comparison and self‐categorization theories suggests a promising approach to explain why more egalitarian societies can paradoxically create greater psychological differences between women and men.     

Direct and Indirect Assessment of Gender Role Identification

Differences in gender role identification exist among both men and women. Earlier researchers have developed several instruments to measure the degree to which individuals identify with the masculine or feminine gender role. In the present study we examined a number of these measurement procedures. Undergraduate students (N?=?45) were administered three direct and two indirect measures of gender role identification. In addition, participants were exposed to a psychological stress test that was relatively masculine. Findings reveal that direct and indirect instruments tap different underlying constructs of gender role identification that are nevertheless positively correlated. Furthermore, results suggest that one of the indirect measures, the Gender Implicit Association Test (GIAT), is a promising instrument to provide an estimate of gender role identification. Of all gender role identification measures the GIAT was (a) most sensitive to sex differences and (b) the only significant predictor of systolic blood pressure responses during and after the relatively masculine stress task.     

Wimpy and undeserving of respect: Penalties for men’s gender-inconsistent success

Results of an experimental study varying the sex of the employee and the gender-type of the job demonstrated that men, as well as women, are penalized when they are successful in areas that imply that they have violated gender norms. But the nature of these penalties differed. When depicted as being successful at a female gender-typed job, men were characterized as more ineffectual and afforded less respect than women successful at the same job or than men successful in a gender-consistent position. Women, in contrast, were more interpersonally derogated and disliked when said to be successful at a male gender-typed job. Regardless of these differing characterizations, both men and women successful in gender-inconsistent jobs were reported to be less preferable as bosses than their more normatively consistent counterparts. These results suggest that success, when it violates gender norms, can be disadvantageous for both men and women, but in different ways.     

Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: why do women like women more than men like men?

Four experiments confirmed that women's automatic in-group bias is remarkably stronger than men's and investigated explanations for this sex difference, derived from potential sources of implicit attitudes (L. A. Rudman, 2004). In Experiment 1, only women (not men) showed cognitive balance among in-group bias, identity, and self-esteem (A. G. Greenwald et al., 2002), revealing that men lack a mechanism that bolsters automatic own group preference. Experiments 2 and 3 found pro-female bias to the extent that participants automatically favored their mothers over their fathers or associated male gender with violence, suggesting that maternal bonding and male intimidation influence gender attitudes. Experiment 4 showed that for sexually experienced men, the more positive their attitude was toward sex, the more they implicitly favored women. In concert, the findings help to explain sex differences in automatic in-group bias and underscore the uniqueness of gender for intergroup relations theorists.     

Gender and relationships: Influences on agentic and communal behaviors

The present research examined the moderating influence of situations involving friends and romantic partners on gender differences in interpersonal behaviors reflecting agency and communion. Behavior was studied in three situations varying in social role and dyadic gender composition: same‐sex friendships, opposite‐sex friendships, and romantic relationships. To obtain multiple events representing each relationship situation, participants recorded information about their interpersonal interactions during a 20‐day period using an event‐contingent recording procedure. Results indicated gender differences consistent with gender stereotypes when men and women were interacting with same‐sex friends; men with men were more dominant and women with women were more agreeable. In interactions with romantic partners, gender differences in communal behavior were opposite to gender stereotypes; women were less agreeable and more quarrelsome than men with their romantic partners. Results are considered in reference to developmental socialization theory, social role theory, and studies of gender differences in marital relationships.     

Marital status as a candidate moderator variable of male-female differences in sexual jealousy: the need for representative population samples

Evolutionary psychological theories predict pronounced and universal male-female differences in sexual jealousy. Recent cross-cultural research, using the forced-choice jealousy items pioneered by Buss, et al., 1992, repeatedly found a large sex differential on these self-report measures: men significantly more often than women choose their mate's imagined sexual infidelity to be more distressing or upsetting to them than an imagined emotional infidelity. However, this body of evidence is solely based on undergraduate samples and does not take into account demographic factors. This study examined male-female differences in sexual jealousy in a community sample (N = 335, Eastern Austria). Within a logistic regression model, with other variables controlled for, marital status was a stronger predictor for sexual jealousy than respondents' sex. Contrary to previous research, the sex differential's effect size was only modest. These findings stress the pitfalls of prematurely generalizing evidence from undergraduate samples to the general population and the need for representative population samples in this research area.