Who Benefits from Pennebaker’s Expressive Writing Paradigm? Research Recommendations from Three Gender Theories

Pennebaker’s experimental writing paradigm quantifies who, when, and how people benefit from writing about trauma, but researchers and meta-analyses thus far have rarely considered gender. Gender theories specify useful research strategies. Gender schema theory suggests examining gendered measurement biases, gender-relevant writing content, and whether traditional masculinity predicts benefits. Social role theory suggests assessing physician visits, disclosure history, and privacy as possible moderators of benefits. Socialization theory suggests assessing emotional approach coping, imagined readers, alexithymia, and whether mastery instructions influence benefits. All specify measuring functionally related gender constructs (gender schemas, gender roles, and socialization), asking whether gender proxies co-varying moderators and mediators of benefits, and examining possible linkages between benefits, trauma type, and disclosure. Help-seeking and somatization require integrated theoretical approaches.     

More Research Questions: Rebuttal to Bornstein, Langer, and Stickney

Stickney (2010), Bornstein (2010), and Langer (2010) expand the research recommendations for experimental writing research that Range and Jenkins (2010) generated from gender schema, gender role, and socialization theory. Stickney derives research questions from communication and emotion theory. Bornstein and Langer focus on assessment in this paradigm. Bornstein’s multimodal assessment strategy might improve understanding of apparently inconsistent findings, indicate unstudied processes of interest, and show how changing instructions might maximize writing benefits. Langer’s recommendations to examine gender differences in pre/post/and follow-up emotional outcomes, and in subjective, expressive, and physiological indicators of emotion, identify potential new outcome measures in this research. All three commentaries show promise of advancing our understanding of how writing about trauma might help women and men.     

Inside out,or outside in: meeting with couples

The complex difficulties often faced by couples require a range of models for effective help. Relational intensity is heightened in therapy by the ease with which the therapist can be triangled into the couple's relationship and by the influence of the emotional triggers from their respective internal worlds. This article draws on systemic and psychodynamic models and a transgenerational perspective for gendered stories. Different time frameworks link interpersonal and intrapersonal themes. In this sense, the therapist works ‘inside out’ and ‘outside in’. A framework of behaviours, emotions, feelings, meanings and beliefs is proposed to help link these perspectives. ‘Invisible contracts’ and the sense of there often being an unconscious ‘pact to disappoint’ are described. Clear models are not enough, for it is the intimate encounter between client and therapist that is the bedrock of therapeutic change and growth. There is no short cut to this sense of intimacy in the unique encounter between therapist and each new couple. Brief examples from practice describe how the issues discussed may be addressed in couples work.     

The Social Roles Questionnaire: A New Approach to Measuring Attitudes Toward Gender

Innovative research is constrained by instruments that assume gender to be captured by dichotomous categories. This article presents the results of two studies that document the psychometric properties of the Social Roles Questionnaire (SRQ), a new measure of gender role attitudes. A social constructivist perspective guided the development of the instrument that was designed not only to capture the diversity in people’s thinking about social roles for men and women, but also to identify attitudes that transcend binary categories. The article details the process of assessing reliability and validity based on data from 414 undergraduates. Findings revealed the SRQ is reliable and valid and that women were more likely than men to endorse egalitarian and gender transcendent beliefs. Additional possible uses of the SRQ are discussed.     

“Clean and Fresh”: Understanding Women’s use of Vaginal Hygiene Products

We explore Canadian women’s use of vaginal hygiene products including feminine washes, douches, sprays, deodorants, wipes, and powders. Vaginal hygiene products in North America are part of a two billion dollar industry, which focuses on cleanliness and freshness in their advertising toward women. In interviewing women who were currently using or had previously used vaginal hygiene products, we found that vaginal cleanliness and freshness were also frequently brought up as reasons for using these products. Using an inductive thematic analysis informed by Braun and Clarke (2013) we explore how attaining a clean-and-fresh vagina has become a subjective physical need for the participants in our study. In a society where female genitalia are constructed as unclean, we argue the marketing of vaginal hygiene products contributes to the problematization of women’s genitalia by suggesting women need to use these products to attain an ideal (i.e., clean and fresh) vagina. The reliance on vaginal hygiene products reported by participants in attaining sensations of vaginal cleanliness and freshness raises concerns in the context of medical literature suggesting adverse health risks that may result from using some of these products. Potential risks include bacterial vaginosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, and a higher susceptibility to sexually transmitted infections, among others. We believe that companies that advertise these products as beneficial for vaginal health and hygiene can be perceived as not just misinforming women but also profiting from products that are harmful.     

Understanding ‘Unlikely (20% Likelihood)’ or ‘20% Likelihood (Unlikely)’ Outcomes: The Robustness of the Extremity Effect

Calls to communicate uncertainty using mixed, verbal‐numerical formats (‘unlikely [0–33%]’) have stemmed from research comparing mixed with solely verbal communications. Research using the new ‘which outcome’ approach to investigate understanding of verbal probability expressions suggests, however, that mixed formats might convey disadvantages compared with purely numerical communications. When asked to indicate an outcome that is ‘unlikely’, participants have been shown to often indicate outcomes with a value exceeding the maximum value shown, equivalent to a 0% probability —an ‘extremity effect’. Recognising the potential consequences of communication recipients expecting an ‘unlikely’ event to never occur, we extend the ‘which outcome’ work across four experiments, using verbal, numerical, and verbal‐numerical communication formats, as well as a previously unconsidered numerical‐verbal format. We examine how robust the effect is in the context of consequential outcomes and over non‐normal distributions. We also investigate whether participants are aware of the inconsistency in their responses from a traditional ‘how likely’ and ‘which outcome’ task. We replicate and extend previous findings, with preference for extreme outcomes (including above maximum values) observed in both verbal and verbal‐numerical formats. Our results suggest caution in blanket usage of recently recommended verbal‐numerical formats for the communication of uncertainty. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.