Reexamining Masculinity, Femininity,and Gender Identity Scales

Key takeaways

(file:///C:\Users\scott\Zotero\storage\QRT2WRDT\Palan%20et%20al.%20-%20Reexamining%20Masculinity,%20Femininity,and%20Gender%20Ide.pdf)

Bibliography: Palan, K.M., Areni, C.S., Kiecker, P., 1999. Reexamining Masculinity, Femininity,and Gender Identity Scales.

Authors:: Kay M Palan, Charles S Areni, Pamela Kiecker

Collections:: Gender Scale

First-page: 363

Abstract

This research compares and contrasts three gender identity instruments, the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI), the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), and the Sexual Identity Scale (SIS), that have been used in previous investigations of various aspects of consumer behavior. Speci®cally, it examines the dimensionality and internal reliability of each scale, inter-scale correlations, and the relationship of each scale to biological sex. Results indicate that the gender identity scales consist of several dimensions beyond those typically interpreted as masculinity and femininity. The femininity factors emerging in the three scales tended to be highly correlated, and females scored higher than males on the femininity factors. However, the three masculinity factors were not correlated with one another, and were not as strongly associated with biological sexÐfemales identi®ed with typically masculine traits just as much as males. The implications of these results for using gender identity in consumer research are discussed, and future research opportunities are explored.

Citations

content: "@palanReexaminingMasculinityFemininity1999" -file:@palanReexaminingMasculinityFemininity1999

Reading notes

Imported on 2025-04-27 17:44

⭐ Important

& Results indicate that the gender identity scales consist of several dimensions beyond those typically interpreted as masculinity and femininity. (p. 363)
& femininity factors emerging in the three scales tended to be highly correlated, and females scored higher than males on the femininity factors. However, the three masculinity factors were not correlated with one another, and were not as strongly associated with biological sex–females identiÆed with typically masculine traits just as much as males. (p. 363)
& How people learn to be masculine or feminine is believed to be the result of socialization (Bem, 1981) (p. 364)
& Most psychologists conceptualize masculinity and femininity as two separate, orthogonal dimensions, coexisting in varying degrees within an individual (Gill et al., 1987). (p. 364)
& This conceptualization allows for individuals to be sex-typed, that is, an individual either endorses primarily masculine or primarily feminine characteristics, or to be androgynous, (p. 364)
& Traditionally, a masculine gender identity is said to encompass personality traits such as independence, assertiveness, instrumentality, and competitiveness (Cross and Markus, 1993). Gill et al. (1987, p. 379) deÆned masculinity as ``concern with the attainment of goals external to the interaction process.'' (p. 365)
& In contrast, femininity centers on relational personality traits, such as understanding, caring, nurturance, responsibility, considerateness, and sensitivity (Cross and Markus, 1993). Femininity thus involves an awareness of others, interdependence, and ``gives primacy to facilitating the interaction process itself'' (Gill et al., 1987, p. 380). (p. 365)
& Both measures incorporate the multidimensional conceptualization of gender identity, i.e., that masculinity and femininity coexist in varying degrees within an individual (Bem, 1974; Spence, Helmreich, and Stapp, 1975). (p. 365)
& In contrast to the BSRI and the PAQ, the SIS is a subjective measure of an individual's sexual identity–``how masculine/feminine s/he appears to him/herself'' (Stern et al., 1987, p. 505). (p. 366)