In the second step, they were invited to a speech lab to provide recordings of spontaneous spoken speech and text reading as well as a photograph of their face.
The sampling of women took place in a phonetic laboratory in the Center of General Linguistics in Berlin and was done by a female investigator, whereas the sampling of men took place at a phonetic laboratory of the University of Jena and was done by a male investigator. Voice pitch characteristics were measured on the basis of spontaneous speech.
In the last step we asked judges to rate speech recordings, facial photographs, and the combination of both dichotomously regarding sexual orientation for a randomly selected subset of 18 lesbians, gay men, straight women, and men, respectively Kachel et al. Male participants were re-invited after 1 year to the phonetic laboratory of the University of Jena. All results refer to the first measurement except for those that are explicitly indicated to belong to second measurement.
It replicated all findings of the pilot study. In detail, a KMO criterion of 0. An additional exploratory factor analysis with PAF of participants at second measurement replicated the findings indicating a one-dimensional factor structure.
The one-factor solution was confirmed by graphical scree-plot analysis. Which of the gender-related instruments are able to predict a person's gender and sexual orientation? Simple-effects tests with Bonferroni adjustment were added. Table 4 shows main and interaction effects as well as mean scores for all gender-related instruments separately for lesbians, straight women, gay, and straight men.
Table 4. Both effects explained more variance in the TMF than in all other gender-related instruments in this study. Hence, comparing lesbians and gay men constituted a stricter test of all scales. In short, the TMF showed the expected mean differences between all groups, it was the only scale in this study that was able to detect differences between lesbians and gay men, and it showed the largest mean difference between straight women and men.
Furthermore, the TMF differentiated the groups as expected see Figure 4. Additionally, the TMF was best in predicting gender on the basis of scale scores as can be seen in Table 5 in which results of binary logistic regression models for all gender-related scales are shown.
Almost identical percentages of women and men were correctly classified. Compared to all other measures under investigation, the TMF seemed to be the most precise instrument to differentiate between women and men regardless of their sexual orientation. Figure 4. Mean TMF scores separately for gender and sexual orientation. Error bars represent standard errors of means. Table 5. Regarding TMF, group differences in women's sample were already mentioned above.
As in Study 1, straight women described themselves as more feminine compared to lesbians on the GRB-F. Means were particularly close together for adjective-based gender-related instruments such as the GEPAQ.
Reliabilities and correlations on all gender-related instruments can be seen in Table 6. Three out of five correlations with the TMF were significant.
The correlations for the first two instruments were in the expected direction: The more feminine the women rated themselves on the TMF, the higher their scores on behavior-based femininity GRB-F and childhood gender-conformity CGRB.
Moreover, after adjusting the significance level according to the Bonferroni formula, the correlation was not significant anymore. Table 6. Reliabilities and bivariate correlations of gender-related scales for women and men in Study 2 at first measurement. Can the TMF predict women's sexual orientation better than other measures? We added the TMF in the last step of a binary regression model.
Results can be seen in Table 7. In contrast to Study 1, the TMF did not outperform all other measures. Only the GRB-F was found to predict women's sexual orientation. Table 7. Stepwise, logistic regression analysis for predicting women's sexual orientation based on gender-related scales in study 2 at first measurement.
As indicated in Table 4 , all differences in the male subsample were in the expected directions. As for the female subsample, the TMF did not predict sexual orientation better than other measures when it was added in the last step of a binary regression model see Table 8. This could be interpreted as suggesting that TMF does not contribute at all to explaining sexual orientation. To answer these questions, in a supplementary binary regression model, only adjective-based scales were included as predictors.
Table 8. Stepwise, logistic regression analysis for predicting men's sexual orientation based on gender-related scales in study 2 at first measurement. We collected data on several psychological and acoustic criterion characteristics. We computed bivariate correlation coefficients for the TMF with these characteristics in order to test the criterion validity of TMF separately for women see Table 9 and men see Table Additionally, correlations for all other gender-related scales included in Study 2 were computed as a comparison.
Table 9. Bivariate correlations of gender-related instruments and criterion characteristics for women in study 2. Table Bivariate correlations of gender-related instruments and criterion characteristics for men in study 2.
All correlations were in the expected direction: The higher women spoke on average and the higher their voice pitch range and variability, the more likely they rated themselves as feminine. The TMF showed 9 out of 16 possible significant correlations which is more than any other gender-related scale. CGRB followed with 6 out of 16 possible significant correlations. Hence, the TMF showed higher convergent validity than the other gender-related scales.
Table 11 contains findings regarding test-retest reliability and predictive validity. According to the intercorrelation of TMF scores at first and second measurement, 1-year reliability for the TMF was 0.
Hypothesis 12 was confirmed. Reliabilities and correlations for gender-related measures between first columns and second rows Measurement in Study 3. As can be seen in Table 11 , both correlations were significant, of moderate size, and in the expected directions, confirming Hypothesis In Study 2, we found that all TMF items loaded strongly on one single factor at first and second measurement, replicating the pilot study and confirming Hypothesis 1 again.
The TMF showed sufficient reliabilities for women and men. Confirming Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4, the TMF turned out to be the best gender-related instrument for differentiating straight and gay men at first and second measurement and lesbians and straight women compared to all other scales used in Study 2 see Table 4.
The evidence for high incremental validity in predicting women's sexual orientation from Study 1 could not be replicated nor extended to men. We assume that the inclusion of GRB-F in the regression model reduced apparent error variance and thus changed the relation between GRB-M and sexual orientation from descriptive to statistically significant.
However, as GRB-M was again non-significant in Step 3 of the regression model, we suggest that masculine everyday behavior was not strongly related to sexual orientation in our women's sample.
However, when including adjective-based instruments only, TMF predicted sexual orientation in women and men better than established adjective -based instruments.
Partially confirming Hypothesis 7, the TMF showed moderate correlations with some other gender-related scales. Importantly, the TMF was connected to multiple criterion characteristics for women e.
The TMF revealed moderate test-retest-reliability and predictive validity confirming Hypotheses 12 and Gender research has developed many instruments to measure different aspects of self-ascriptions of gender stereotypical features, including attributes, behaviors, interests, and attitudes Beere, The TMF was shown to reliably measure an underlying, one-dimensional construct, and it was found to be a valid instrument for assessing masculinity-femininity because it a successfully differentiated between groups that were expected to differ women vs.
Whereas, some well-established, adjective-based scales e. In line with Choi and Fuqua , high correlations between the separate TMF femininity and masculinity scales as shown in Study 1 suggest a bipolar, one-dimensional use of this instrument reflecting laypersons' ideas of masculinity and femininity as two extremes of one continuum. All items were shown to load on one factor and represent a one-dimensional construct masculinity-femininity.
Moreover, in spite of its brevity, the TMF showed high internal consistencies across all studies as well as satisfactory test-retest reliability in a sample of men. However, the one-dimensionality of the TMF was demonstrated with participants identifying themselves as women or men.
Possibly, the two-dimensional TMF version is superior than the one-dimensional version for samples that comprise a larger number of participants transgressing or rejecting the binary gender system e. Future research is needed to clarify that question. One could object against using the bipolar TMF scale that its midpoint is ambiguous. One could imagine that people scoring either high or low on both dimensions would erroneously be treated as one group. In terms of validity, using a known-groups approach as an established psychological method for validity tests e.
With reference to sexual orientation, straight and bisexual women rated themselves higher on femininity and lower on masculinity than lesbians did Study 1. According to implicit gender inversion theory, gay men should have scored higher than lesbians on femininity and lower on masculinity, which was not the case in our sample.
It appears that gay men and lesbians rather self-stereotype as men and women, respectively, and thus construct their self-concept in line with their gender group. Based on these findings, we conclude that the TMF's ability for determining gender and sexual orientation was generally high, and higher than that of all other gender-related measures investigated in the present studies. Hence, the TMF was shown to be a valid scale for assessing gender-role self-concept. It was expected that the TMF would correlate moderately with other gender-related scales.
That was the case for all gender-related scales in Study 1 where only a female sample was tested. Only correlations with the Childhood Gender-Behavior Scale were high, which could be due to selective memory recall and hence reflect current gender-related self-assessment see Bailey and Zucker, measured with the TMF. Correlations between the TMF and gender-related scales were smaller for a second sample of women Study 2 which could be due to differences in sampling and substitutions of scales e.
Connected to that, the incremental validity of the TMF for predicting women's sexual orientation was demonstrated in Study 1 only. However, the male sample in Study 2 showed overall moderate correlations of the TMF and gender-related scales, but no additional ability of the TMF to predict sexual orientation. The fact that the TMF did not always demonstrate additional predictive value for explaining differences between groups does not indicate that it is superfluous.
And the TMF predicted sexual orientation still better than established adjective-based instruments in women and men in Study 2 which was demonstrated after excluding the most predictive scales.
To deal with a common critique that self-report instruments measure differences in social desirability rather than true differences, we used an implicit measure of women's self-feminine vs.
Study 1 showed that the correlations of these associations were higher for the TMF than for self-ratings of traits or behaviors. It is also a substantive finding of the present studies that goes beyond mere scale validation. Correlation analyses showed that gender-conformity on the TMF was significantly linked to perceived straightness for almost each presentation mode voice, face, and the combination of both for men and women.
Moreover, higher femininity in women was associated with higher voice pitch features average, variability, and range and higher masculinity in men was connected to less contact to gay men. Compared to other gender-related scales, the TMF was superior in convergent validity. In sum, this indicates that the TMF measures something fundamental regarding gender-related self-assessment. It is also another substantive finding of the present studies that goes beyond mere scale validation.
A limitation is that patterns of findings partially differed between women and men, and which specific criteria mattered in which sub-sample appeared a bit arbitrary e.
However, in every case determining and predicting gender and sexual orientation, convergent, and criterion validity , as a rule the TMF was better than the one-item-measure e. The TMF is designed as a self-assessment instrument for masculinity-femininity on a rather global level with regard to two different respects.
First, the TMF is based on a trait rather than a normative approach see Thompson and Bennet, and conceptualizes masculinity-femininity as a long-term characteristic varying between people. However, it does not exclude variation on masculinity-femininity within a person depending on different social, temporal, or regional contexts.
Its focus is on a trait-like global average score across contexts. Second, it is more global because it focuses on a higher-order masculinity-femininity construct which is beyond specific components such as traits, interests, physical characteristics, or attitudes, and asks for an aggregated self-assessment across these domains.
The high test-retest reliability obtained over a 1-year period indicated stability rather than variance. However, it would be interesting to know which components mainly account for an individual's judgment of their own gender-related identity. The TMF could be a valuable instrument for future research dealing with that question. However, the TMF does not measure if participants' conceptions of gender-role identity aspects correspond to traditional views.
However, large differences are not likely because people within one culture know about traditional gender roles. Hence, it seems plausible that the problem of item aging is mitigated for the near future because of the more global wordings. Additionally, we are positive that the TMF can be used in different countries and cultures because of its global level of measurement.
They found that the TMF was moderately connected to different aspects of social identification with one's own gender in the expected directions for men and women. According to Leach et al. The TMF was shown to be linked to almost all of its different components individual self-stereotyping, in-group homogeneity, satisfaction, solidarity, and centrality for women and men except for in-group homogeneity for men.
Future research should provide evidence for the applicability in non-German samples. In a nutshell, as long as societies assume differences in interests, attitudes, clothing style, and behavior between women and men, we suggest that the TMF provides a valuable addition to researchers' toolbox. For example, are self-ratings on the TMF related to biological markers of masculinity-femininity such as waist-to-hip ratio and finger length i.
Do self-ratings on the TMF predict behaviors in which large gender differences have been observed, such as socio-sexuality or animal cruelty? Are self-ratings on the TMF related to performance in domains where gender differences are reliable, such as mental rotation? Finally, are self-ratings on the TMF related to personality traits in which gender differences have been observed, such as self-esteem and social dominance orientation? Generally, we believe that many different research questions related to gender-related self-assessments could benefit from using the TMF.
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved: SK, MS.
Falling short can make boys and men insecure and anxious, which might prompt them to use force in order to feel, and be seen as, dominant and in control. As this research was popularized, however, it was increasingly mischaracterized. Kupers told me that he believes critics of his study incorrectly assumed that he claimed masculinity itself is toxic, though he acknowledged that the article could have explained his position in greater detail. Since then, the return to toxic masculinity has leaked from academic literature to wide cultural circulation.
In some educational settings , these programs are becoming mandatory. Certainly, these programs can have a positive impact. Research consistently shows that boys and men who hold sexist attitudes are more likely to perpetrate gendered violence. There are well-known gender patterns in violent and abusive behavior. The question is: Where do these sexist attitudes come from? Like Post Submit a post.
Image Credit. Discover other stories from young voices around the world -and share yours! Register in our web , follow us on Twitter or use the hashtag VoicesOfYouth on your social media channels.
Ready to speak up for the issues you care about? View the discussion thread. Related Stories Submit a Post. Human Rights. One study found that over a quarter of men thought they should have the final word in relationships, over a third of men believed that they had the right to know where their female partner was at all times.
Emotion is treated as being a feminine characteristic. Stifling emotion is seen as true manliness. From childhood, males are shamed to conform with the standard that to show emotion is weak and feminine. It is unsurprising that the overly masculine would reject men who identify as the allies of feminists.
Research shows that men engaging in feminist activism are the targets of harassment by men who prescribe to toxic masculinity as it is perceived as feminine and non-conformist to toxic masculinity. Connected to male dominance, toxic masculinity encourages taking risks to demonstrate dominance, men who buy into this are more likely to take extreme measures such as perpetrate violence, drive dangerously, gamble, abuse drugs.
Again, housework and childrearing are seen as feminine qualities. Being asked to do a feminine deemed task such as housework, or worse, a man being criticised by a woman for not cleaning appropriately is often interpreted as an emasculating assault and provokes a masculine overcompensation response. Aurora New Dawn is a feminist led charity dedicated to ending violence against women and children, and hidden violence. Since , Aurora New Dawn has offered safety, support, advocacy, and empowerment to survivors of domestic abuse, sexual violence and stalking.
We offer a variety of services and are involved in supporting feminist campaigns to end male violence against women. Overall, as the previous behaviour shows, it can be seen that Toxic Masculinity will repeatedly reject femininity in all its supposed forms.
When a man smashes against gender norms or supports femininity, it has a stigma attached. If they do, these men will be abused, shamed or humiliated by a society embarrassed by the fact they are not conforming to masculine ideals. This sends out a clear core belief of toxic masculinity: femininity is seen to be lesser than masculinity.
0コメント