| Abstract: | Given evidence that men's and women's aggression meaningfully differ in terms of motivations, methods, and consequences, behavior scientists increasingly recognize the importance of integrating gender socialization and masculine‐relevant processes into models for understanding and preventing men's violence. As such, the Gender Role Strain Paradigm, a contemporary framework for conceptualizing the psychological and physical problems common to men, has been widely utilized in aggression research. However, translation of this paradigm into effective violence prevention and intervention efforts remains stalled by controversy over measurement and methodology. After a brief review of the Gender Role Strain Paradigm and its contributions to aggression research, the current paper details recent methodological advancements in the measurement of masculine discrepancy stress/strain, a form of distress arising from perceived failures to conform to socially‐prescribed masculine gender role norms. The validity of masculine discrepancy stress is described in terms of its predictive utility and its ability to address longstanding critiques of the Gender Role Strain Paradigm. Finally, masculine discrepancy stress is discussed in terms of its violence prevention and intervention implications. |
