Conforming to Masculine Norms: Evidence for Validity among Adult Men and Women
- 791 Downloads
Assessment of masculinity as an ideological belief system (MI) has become increasingly popular. Validation of MI measures and subsequent research has relied heavily on undergraduate samples. In the present study, convergent and divergent validity of the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (Mahalik et al., Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 4: 3–25, 2003) were examined among a convenience sample of 688 male and female adults who were divided into four groups (undergraduates, younger adults, middle-aged adults, older adults). Across groups, convergent validity was suggested by consistent relations with sexism, and divergent validity was suggested by consistent nonsignificant relations with masculine attributes. Results suggest that generalizations among male groups can be made with caution and that generalizations to women may be appropriate when the focal constructs are unrelated to women or femininity.
KeywordsMasculinity ideology gender sex differences sexism femininity
My thanks to Carolyn Mebert, who taught me to always check my assumptions, Ellen Cohn for suggestions regarding data collection, and the other members of my dissertation committee. Thanks also to Monique Ward, Jim Mahalik, Ron Levant, and several anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions and insights. Finally, my thanks to Meghan Basile, Steve McIsaac, Lynn Reingold, Heather Roy, and Allison Shupe for their help with data collection and data entry.
- Bauman, K. J., & Graf, N. L. (2003). Educational attainment 2000: Census 2000 brief. Washington, District of Columbia: US Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2003/cb03-125.html).
- Bohan, J. S. (1997). Regarding gender: Essentialism, constructionism, and feminist psychology. In M. M. Gergen & S. N. Davis (Eds.), Toward a new psychology of gender (pp. 31–48). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- David, D., & Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture’s blueprint for manhood and what it’s done for us lately. In D. David & R. Brannon (Eds.), The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex role (pp. 1–48). Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Hare-Mustin, R. T., & Marecek, J. (1990). On making a difference. In R. T. Hare-Mustin & J. Marecek (Eds.), Making a difference: Psychology and the construction of gender (pp. 1–21). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Hochschild, A., & Machung, A. (2003). The second shift (2nd edn.). New York: Penguin (first published in 1989).Google Scholar
- Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn.). Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
- Levant, R. F., Hirsch, L. S., Celentano, E., Cozza, T. M., Hill, S., & MacEachern, M., et al. (1992). The male role: An investigation of contemporary norms. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 14, 325–337.Google Scholar
- Pleck, J. H. (1995). The gender role strain paradigm: An update. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 11–32). New York: Basic.Google Scholar
- Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates and antecedents. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
- Thompson, E. H. Jr., & Pleck, J. H. (1986). The structure of male role norms. American Behavioral Scientist, 29, 531–543.Google Scholar
- Thompson, E. H., Jr., & Pleck, J. H. (1995). Masculinity ideologies: A review of research instrumentation on men and masculinities. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 129–163). New York, New York: Basic.Google Scholar
- Unger, R. K. (1990). Imperfect reflections of reality: Psychology constructs gender. In R. T. Hare-Mustin & J. Marecek (Eds.), Making a difference: Psychology and the construction of gender (pp. 102–149). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Villemez, W. J., & Touhey, J. C. (1977). A measure of individual differences in sex stereotyping and sex discrimination: The ‘Macho’ Scale. Psychological Reports, 41, 411–415.Google Scholar
- William T. Grant Commission on Work, Families, and Children. (1988). The forgotten half: Pathways to success for America’s youth and young families. Washington, District of Columbia: William T. Grant Commission on Work, Family, and Citizenship.Google Scholar