Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Current Gender Meanings: Creating a New Gender Identity Scale

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advancing Identity Theory, Measurement, and Research

Part of the book series: Frontiers in Sociology and Social Research ((FSSR,volume 10))

Abstract

To measure gender identity in past research, identity theorists have used the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ). Other researchers studying gender identity have used either the PAQ or Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). Both the PAQ and BSRI are classic gender scales that emerged 40+ years ago to measure gender meanings in American culture. At issue is whether these scales continue to reflect current gender meanings in American society. We investigate this by gathering contemporary meanings on men and women from a racially diverse group of over 900 U.S. young adults at two universities. We follow measurement procedures outlined in identity theory to measure gender meanings (Burke & Tully, Social Forces, 55(4), 881–897, 1977). When we compare respondents’ gender meanings with those in the PAQ and BSRI, words for masculine and feminine characteristics used 40+ years ago are not commonly used today. While we see the common distinction of men as agentic and women as communal, women are now described as more competent than men, and men and women tend to evaluate men more negatively than women. We use our findings to develop a new gender identity scale in which the meanings better reflect how man and women are seen in contemporary society. This can be used in future research to capture gender identity in modern times.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this paper, we do not examine racial or class variations in gender meanings. We leave this to future research.

  2. 2.

    The items Rosenkrantz and his colleagues used in their survey in the 1960s were obtained by asking college students to list characteristics typically associated with men and women.

  3. 3.

    Sixteen items for men represent one end of the masculine scale (8 items) and the masculine end of the masculine-feminine scale (8 items). Sixteen items for women represent one end of the feminine scale (8 items) and the feminine end of the masculine-feminine scale (8 items).

  4. 4.

    A full list of the collapsed meanings and the words that comprise them is available upon request.

  5. 5.

    We are guided by the words that Eagly and associates (2020) use to characterize agency, competence, and communion.

  6. 6.

    In a follow-up regression analysis, we estimated whether each of the meanings in Table 5.4 would still describe “Men usually are” compared to “Women usually are” when controlling for the other meanings in the table. Except for two meanings that perfectly described men but not women (angry and prideful), and two meanings that perfectly described women but not men (happy and homemaker), all meanings remained significant ( p ≤ .01).

References

  • Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besen-Cassino, Y. (2019). Gender threat and men in the post-trump world: The effects of a changing economy on men's housework. Men and Masculinities, 22(1), 44–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, S. M., Sayer, L. C., Milkie, M. A., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Housework: Who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter? Social Forces, 91(1), 55–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. J., & Cast, A. D. (1997). Stability and change in the gender identities of newly married couples. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60(4), 277–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2023). Identity theory: Revised and expanded (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. J., Stets, J. E., & Pirog-Good, M. (1988). Gender identity, self-esteem, and physical and sexual abuse in dating relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51(3), 272–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. J., & Tully, J. C. (1977). The measurement of role identity. Social Forces, 55(4), 881–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotter, D., Hermsen, J. M., & Vanneman, R. (2011). The end of the gender revolution? Gender role attitudes from 1977 to 2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117(1), 259–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, K., & Twenge, J. M. (2017). Masculine and feminine traits on the bem sex-role inventory, 1993-2012: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 76, 556–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1994). Are people prejudiced against women? Some answers from research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and judgements of competence. European Review of Social Psychology, 5(1), 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Nater, C., Miller, D. I., Kaufmann, M., & Sczesny, S. (2020). Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist, 75(3), 301–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Johannesson, M. C. (2004). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: Implications for the partner preferences of women and men. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (pp. 269–295). The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 275–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24(2), 149–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • England, P., Levine, A., & Mishel, E. (2020). Progress toward gender equality in the United States has slowed or stalled. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(13), 6990–6997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisk, S. R., & Ridgeway, C. L. (2018). Framing gender. In B. J. Risman, C. M. Froyum, & W. J. Scarborough (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of gender (pp. 157–171). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heise, D. R. (2010). Survey cultures: Discovering shared conceptions and sentiments. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, R. M. (2001). The measurement of masculinity and femininity: Historical perspective and implications for counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development, 97, 472–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 498–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalev, A., & Deutsch, G. (2018). Gender inequality and workplace organizations: Understanding reproduction and change. In B. J. Risman, C. M. Froyum, & W. J. Scarborough (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of gender (pp. 257–269). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, A. M., & Eagly, A. H. (2014). Evidence for the social role theory of stereotype content: Observations of groups' roles shape stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(3), 371–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroska, A. (2014). The social psychology of gender inequality. In J. D. McLeod, E. J. Lawler, & M. Schwalbe (Eds.), Handbook of the social psychology of inequality (pp. 485–514). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Langford, T., & MacKinnon, N. J. (2000). The affective bases for the gendering of traits: Comparing the United States and Canada. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(1), 34–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levanon, A., & Grusky, D. B. (2016). The persistence of extreme gender segregation in the twenty-first century. American Journal of Sociology, 122(2), 573–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, A., & Phillips, E. (2018). Gender and education. In B. J. Risman, C. M. Froyum, & W. J. Scarborough (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of gender (pp. 245–255). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Okahana, H., & Zhou, E. (2018). Graduate enrollment and degrees: 2007 to 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepin, J. R., & Cotter, D. A. (2018). Separating spheres? Diverging trends in youth's gender attitudes about work and family. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 80(1), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Research Center. (2013). Modern parenthood: Roles of moms and dads converge as they balance work and family. Pew Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reitzes, D. C., & Burke, P. J. (1980). College student identity: Measurement and implications. Pacific Sociological Review, 23(1), 46–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkrantz, P., Vogel, S., Bee, H., Broverman, I., & Broverman, D. M. (1968). Sex-role stereotypes and self-concepts in college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32(3), 287–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., & Phelan, J. E. (2008). Backlash effects for disconfirming gender stereotypes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarborough, W. J., Sin, R., & Risman, B. J. (2018). Attitudes and the stalled gender revolution: Egalitarianism, traditionalism, and ambivalence from 1977 through 2016. Gender & Society, 33(2), 173–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sczesny, S., Nater, C., & Eagly, A. H. (2019). Agency and communion: Their implications for gender sterotypes and gender identities. In A. E. Abele & B. Wojciske (Eds.), Agency and communion in social psychology (pp. 103–116). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shu, X., & Meagher, K. D. (2018). Beyond the stalled gender revolution: Historical and cohort dynamics in gender attitudes from 1977 to 2016. Social Forces, 96(3), 1243–1274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T. (1985). Gender identity and implications for concepts of masculinity and femininity. In T. Sonderegger (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Psychology and gender (pp. 59–96). University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates and antecedents. The University of Texas Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Helmreich Robert, L., & Stapp, J. (1974). The personal attributes questionnaire: A measure of sex-role stereotypes and masculinity-femininity. Journal of Supplemental Abstract Service Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4(43), 617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stets, J. E. (1995). Role identities and person identities: Gender identity, mastery identity, and controlling one's partner. Sociological Perspectives, 38(2), 129–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stets, J. E. (1997). Status and identity in marital interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60(3), 185–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stets, J. E., & Biga, C. F. (2003). Bringing identity theory into environmental sociology. Sociological Theory, 21(4), 398–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (1996). Gender, control, and interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59(3), 193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stets, J. E., & Carter, M. J. (2011). The moral self: Applying identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74(2), 192–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, O. (2018). The gendered division of household labor. In B. J. Risman, C. M. Froyum, & W. J. Scarborough (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of gender (pp. 377–392). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). Women in the labor force: A databook.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, C. L., & Burke, P. J. (1987). Ethnic role identity among black and white college students: An interactionist approach. Sociological Perspectives, 30(3), 310-331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2015). Two traditions of research on gender identity. Sex Roles, 73, 461–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We thank members of the Social Psychology Research Seminar at the University of California, Riverside, Philip Brenner, Peter J. Burke, Jill Kiecolt, and Ashley Reichelmann for their feedback on earlier drafts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, Riverside, CA, USA

    Jan E. Stets, Melanie Kushida & Phoenicia Fares

  2. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA

    Monica M. Whitham

Authors
  1. Jan E. Stets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melanie Kushida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Phoenicia Fares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Monica M. Whitham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan E. Stets .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Social Psychology Research Laboratory, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA

    Jan E. Stets

  2. Department of Sociology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    Ashley V. Reichelmann

  3. Department of Sociology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    K Jill Kiecolt

Appendices

Appendix 1: The Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ) and Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI)

PAQ

 

Masculine

Feminine

 

Active

Aware of others’ feelings

 

Aggressive

Cries

 

Competitive

Devoted

 

Confident

Emotional

 

Decision-maker

Excitable

 

Does not give up

Feelings not easily hurt

 

Dominant

Gentle

 

Feelings not hurt

Helpful

 

Independent

Home-oriented

 

Never cries

Kind

 

No need for approval

Need for security

 

No need for security

Needs approval

 

Not excitable

Not aggressive

 

Superior

Submissive

 

Withstands pressure

Understanding

 

Worldly

Warm

 

BSRI

Masculine

Feminine

Neutral

Aggressive

Affectionate

Adaptable

Ambitious

Cheerful

Conceited

Analytical

Childlike

Conscientious

Assertive

Compassionate

Conventional

Athletic

Feminine

Friendly

Competitive

Flatterable

Happy

Defends beliefs

Gentle

Helpful

Decision-maker

Gullible

Inefficient

Dominant

Loves children

Jealous

Forceful

Loyal

Likable

Independent

Not harsh language

Moody

Individualistic

Sensitive to others’ needs

Reliable

Leader

Shy

Secretive

Leadership abilities

Soft spoken

Sincere

Masculine

Soothe hurt feelings

Solemn

Risk-taker

Sympathetic

Tactful

Self-reliant

Tender

Theatrical

Self-sufficient

Understanding

Truthful

Strong personality

Warm

Unpredictable

Willing to take a stand

Yielding

Unsystematic

Appendix 2: Final Gender Meanings and Their Descriptors for Mena

Gender meaning

Descriptors

Abrasive

Bad mouther, barbaric, crass, gruff, harsh, jerk, obnoxious, toxic, vulgar

Aggressive

Explosive, passive-aggressive, sexually aggressive, violent

Angry

Annoyed, irritated

Arrogant

Boastful, brash, cocky, conceited, smart ass, stuck up

Athletic

Agile, brawny, buff, built, burly, fit, gymgoer, muscular, sturdy, toned

Bold

Adventurous, brave, brazen, courageous, daring, explorer, fearless, grit, sassy, thrill-seeking

Confident b

 

Direct

Assertive, blunt, forward, outspoken, straightforward, upfront

Disorganized

Chaotic, disorderly, messy, unorganized, unsystematic

Dominant

Bossy, controlling, influence, in charge, overbearing, overpowering, possessive, take charge

Dumb

Dense, idiot, ignorant, imbecilic, irrational, meathead, not smart, stupid, unintelligent

Easygoing

Carefree, chill, cool, laidback, lighthearted, nonchalant, relaxed, unbothered, unflappable

Egotistical

Narcissistic, self-absorbed, self-centered, self-loved, vain

Funny

Comedian, fun, goofy, humorous, playful, silly, witty

Immature

Childish

Leader

Decisionmaker, initiator

Loud

Boisterous

Masculine

Macho, male, manly

Prideful

Proud

Protective

Chivalrous, protector

Provider

Breadwinner, earner, financer, financially stable, household head, worker

Rough

Unrefined

Strong

Empowered, forceful, persuasive, powerful, resilient, thick-skinned, tough

Tall

 

Unemotional

Emotionless, hardhearted, impassive, stoic

  1. aGender meanings on the left are those meanings most often used by respondents. Descriptors on the right were then folded into the relevant meanings. b Empty descriptors on the right had no further descriptors for that meaning

Appendix 3: Final gender meanings and their descriptors for womena

Gender meaning

Descriptors

Appearance-oriented

Appearance, body image, cosmetics, looks, makeup, physical image

Attractive

Adorable, beautiful, charming, cute, dapper, gorgeous, handsome, hot, lovable, pretty, sexy, suave

Careful

Cautious, frugal, risk averse, wary

Caring

Affectionate, caregiver, comforting, loving, nurturing, tender

Clean

Hygienic

Creative

Artistic, crafty, imaginative, innovative, talented

Detailed

Thorough

Emotional

Cries, emotion, expressive, moody, passionate, sentimental

Empathetic

Compassionate, sympathetic, understanding

Feminine

Effeminate, female, girly, ladylike, womanly

Focused

Alert, astute, attentive, aware, listener, mindful, observant, observer, perceptive, vigilant, watchful

Gentle

Soft

Helpful

Big heart, considerate, encouraging, generous, giving, supportive, thoughtful

Kind

Altruistic, nice, pleasant, selfless, softhearted, sweet

Mature b

 

Mistreated

Attacked, belittled, catcalled, criticized, discriminated, disrespected, harassed, ignored, interrupted, objectified, oppressed, overlooked, overpowered, ridiculed, sexualized, shunned, stereotyped, stigmatized, unappreciated, undermined

Multitasker

Multi-focused

Openminded

Accepting, adaptable, adjustable, agreeable, broadminded, consenting, flexible, forgiving, open, receptive, tolerant, versatile, welcoming

Organized

Methodical, meticulous, neat, planner, prepared, scheduled, structured, tidy

Sensitive

Soulful, thin-skinned

Short

 

Small

Dainty, lean, petite, skinny, slim

Smart

Academic, analytical, book smart, brain smart, bright, clever, educated, erudite, insightful, intellectual, intelligent, knowledgeable, logical, rational, reason, studious, well-read, wisdom, wise

Submissive

Capitulation, compliant, docile, passive, subordinate

Weak

Delicate, fragile, frail, not tough, vulnerable, wimp

  1. aGender meanings on the left are those meanings most often used by respondents. Descriptors on the right were then folded into the relevant meanings. b Empty descriptors on the right had no further descriptors for that meaning

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Stets, J.E., Kushida, M., Fares, P., Whitham, M.M. (2023). Exploring Current Gender Meanings: Creating a New Gender Identity Scale. In: Stets, J.E., Reichelmann, A.V., Kiecolt, K.J. (eds) Advancing Identity Theory, Measurement, and Research. Frontiers in Sociology and Social Research, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32986-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32986-9_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-32985-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-32986-9

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation