Sex Roles

, Volume 39, Issue 11–12, pp 929–941 | Cite as

Assessing the Current Validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory

  • Cheryl L. Holt
  • Jon. B. Ellis
Article

Abstract

The Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) is a widelyused instrument in measuring gender role perceptions.Recent concerns regarding the validity of the adjectiveshave arisen as changes in the roles of men and women have occurred in American society sincethe 1970's. A partial replication of the method that Bem(1974) used to validate the masculine and feminineadjectives comprising the instrument was conducted. All but two of the adjectives were validatedusing Bem's criteria. These findings suggest that theBSRI may still be a valid instrument for assessing genderroles. However, evidence was revealed that traditional masculine and feminine gender role perceptionsmay be weakening. Future validation of the BSRI iswarranted in light of these patterns.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.Google Scholar
  2. Bem, S. L. (1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 634–643.Google Scholar
  3. Bem, S. L. (1981). Bem Sex Role Inventory: Professional manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bem, S. L., & Lenney, E. (1976). Sex typing and the avoidance of cross-sex behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 48–54.Google Scholar
  5. Bem, S. L., Martyna, W., & Watson, C. (1976). Sex typing and androgyny: Further explorations of the expressive domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 1016–1023.Google Scholar
  6. Edwards, A. L., & Ashworth, C. D. (1977). A replication study of item selection for the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 501–507.Google Scholar
  7. Ellis, J. B., & Range, L. M. (1988). Femininity and reasons for living. Educational and Psychological Research, 8, 19–24.Google Scholar
  8. Gaudreau, P. (1977). Factor analysis of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 299–302.Google Scholar
  9. Glazer, C. A., & Dusek, J. B. (1985). The relationship between sex-role orientation and resolution of Eriksonian developmental crises. Sex Roles, 13, 653–661.Google Scholar
  10. Gross, R. W., Batlis, N. C., Small, A. C., & Erdwins, C. (1977). Factor structure of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory and the Personal Attributes Questionnaire. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 1122–1124.Google Scholar
  11. Heilbrun, A. B. (1968). Sex-role identity in adolescent females: A theoretical paradox. Adolescence, 3, 79–88.Google Scholar
  12. Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Examining gender and gender role differences in attitudes toward abortion and euthanasia. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  13. Holt, C. L., Zinser, O., & Tennyson, J. A. (1998). Gender differences in object recall: The effects of gender-related stimuli and motivation. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  14. Latorre, R. A. (1978). Gender role and psychological adjustment. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 7, 89–96.Google Scholar
  15. Orlofsky, J. (1977). Sex-role orientation, identity formation, and self-esteem in college men and women. Sex Roles, 3, 561–575.Google Scholar
  16. Pedhazur, E. J., & Tetenbaum, T. J. (1979). Bem Sex-Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 996–1016.Google Scholar
  17. Strahan, R. F. (1975). Remarks on Bem's measurement of psychological androgyny: Alternative methods and a supplementary analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 568–571.Google Scholar
  18. Street, S., Kimmel, E.B., & Kromrey, J. D. (1995). Revisiting university student gender role perceptions. Sex Roles, 33, 183–201.Google Scholar
  19. Street, S., Kromrey, J. D., & Kimmel, E. (1995). University faculty gender roles perceptions. Sex Roles, 32, 407–422.Google Scholar
  20. Street, S., & Meek, P. (1980). Greek and non-Greek student perceptions of sex roles. Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors, 43, 10–14.Google Scholar
  21. Wakefield, J. A., Sasek, J., Friedman, A. F., & Bowden, J. D. (1976). Androgyny and other measures of masculinity-femininity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 766–770.Google Scholar
  22. Walkup, H., & Abbott, R. D. (1978). Cross-validation of item selection on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 63–71.Google Scholar
  23. Waters, C. W., Waters, L. K., & Pincus, S. (1977). Factor analysis of masculine and feminine sex-typed items from the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Psychological Reports, 40, 567–570.Google Scholar
  24. Weiten, W. (1997). Psychology: Themes and variations, briefer version (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  25. Wilson, F. R., & Cook, E. P. (1984). Concurrent validity of four androgyny instruments. Sex Roles, 11, 813–837.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheryl L. Holt
  • Jon. B. Ellis

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations