Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Concurrent validity of four androgyny instruments

  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Four sex-role instruments were administered to a group of 281 graduate and undergraduate students at an urban university. Concurrent validity was examined through the use of correlational and factor-analytic techniques. Seven problems in interpretation of the categorizations made by the several instruments were identified: (1) item homogeneity of individual scales; (2) convergence of corresponding scales and divergence of scales from their complements; (3) multifactoriality; (4) factor complexity; (5) distribution of content across instruments; (6) interaction between factor complexity and content balance; and (7) correspondence of classifications of subjects across instruments.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. Theory and measurement of androgyny: A reply to the Pedhazur-Tetenbaum and Locksley-Colten critiques. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 1047–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S., & Bowers, D. An introduction to multivariate techniques for social and behavioral sciences. N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berzins, J. I., Welling, M. A., & Wetter, R. E. A new measure of psychological androgyny based on the Personality Research Form. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 126–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 1959, 56, 81–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantinople, A. Masculinity-femininity: An exception to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 389–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooley, W. W., & Lohnes, P. R. Multivariate procedures for the behavioral sciences. N. Y.: John Wiley & Sons, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests? Psychometrika, 1951, 16, 297–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayton, W. F., Havu, G. F., Ozmon, K. L., & Tavormina, J. A comparison of the Bem Sex Role Inventory and the PRF ANDRO scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1977, 41, 619–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, R., Batlis, N., Small, A., & Erdwins, C. Factor structure of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory and the Personality Attributes Questionnaire. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1979, 47, 1122–1124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbrun, A. B., Jr. Measurement of masculine and feminine sex-role identities as independent dimensions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976, 44, 183–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. The Varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis, Psychometrika, 1958, 23, 187–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. A., Furman, W., & Young, V. Problems associated with the typological measurement of sex roles and androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 1574–1576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. A., & Worell, J. New formulations of sex roles and androgyny: A critical review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1977, 45, 1101–1115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerlinger, F. N. Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed.) N.Y.: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. Factor analysis. In N. H. Nie, C. H. Hull, J. G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrenner, & D. H. Bent (Eds.) Statistical package for the social sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. Family structure and the socialization of the child. In P. C. Lee and R. S. Stewart (Eds.), Sex differences: Cultural and developmental dimensions. New York: Urizen Books, 1976. (Reprinted from T. Parsons and R. F. Bales, Family, Socialization, and interaction process. N.Y.: The Free Press, 1953.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedhazur, E. J., & Tetenbaum, T. J. The Bem Sex Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 996–1016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piel, E. R. What exactly is androgyny? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, 1980.

  • Pleck, J. Masculinity-femininity: Current and alternative paradigms. Sex Roles, 1975, 1, 161–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. N. Factor analysis of the BSRI revisited: A comprehensive study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, September, 1979.

  • Richardson, M. S., Merrifield, P., & Jacobson, A. A factor analytic study of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, September 1979.

  • Rummel, R. J. Understanding factor analysis. Conflict Resolution, 1967, 11, 444–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. The psychological dimensions of masculinity and femininity: Their correlates and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. The many faces of androgyny: A reply to Locksley and Colten. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 1032–1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Stapp, J. The Personal Attributes Questionnaire: A measure of sex-role stereotypes and masculinity-femininity. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 1974, 4, 43. (Ms. No. 617)

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. Ratings of self and peers on sex-role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 29–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, J. A., Sasek, J., Friedman, A. F., & Bowden, J. D., Androgyny and other measures of masculinity-feminity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976, 44, 766–770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, D. J. Further considerations in applications of factor analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1971, 18, 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whelton, C., & Swindells, T. A factor analysis of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1977, 33, 150–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, J. S., & Holzmuller, A. Psychological androgyny and interpersonal behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 40–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worell, J. Sex roles and psychological well-being: Perspectives on methodology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 777–791.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Cincinnati, USA

    F. Robert Wilson & Ellen Piel Cook

Authors
  1. F. Robert Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ellen Piel Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilson, F.R., Cook, E.P. Concurrent validity of four androgyny instruments. Sex Roles 11, 813–837 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287812

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287812

Keywords

Search

Navigation