Sex Roles, Vol. 38, Nos.

9/10, 1998

Th e Multicultural Masculin ity Ideology Scale: 1 Validation from Th ree Cu ltural Perspectives
Brian D. Doss an d J. Roy Hop kin s 2
St. Marys College of Maryland

The Multicu ltural Mascu lin ity Ideology Scale (MMIS) m easures an in dividual s adaptation an d in ternalization of a cultu res norm s abou t how m en shou ld act. This study extends previou s research on m ascu lin ity ideology by generating a scale represen ting m ultiple cultu ral perspectives usin g 190 Ch ilean, 283 A n gl o - A m e ric a n , a n d 2 9 6 Afric a n - A m e ric a n u n d e rgra d u a te s. Th e psych o m etric properties o f th e MMIS w ere estab lish ed u sin g prin c ip al com ponen ts an alysis, convergen t validity tests, an d in ternal-con sistency and test-retest reliability. Two com pon en ts con sisten t across cu ltu res em erged: Hyp erm a sc u lin e Po stu rin g a n d Ach ieve m en t. In ad d itio n , th ere were cultu rally-specific com pon ents: Tou gh ness, Pose, an d Respon sibility am ong Ch ilean s; Sensitivity am ong Anglo-Am erican s; an d Sexu al Respo nsibility am ong African -Am ericans. Results indicate that the MMIS can be useful for exam inin g a variety of research question s relating to culture an d m asculinity.

Masculinity, originally conceive d as a dime nsion opposite to femininity (se e Constantin ople , 1973) and late r as a personality characte ristic se parate from yet relate d to femininity (e.g., Be m, 1974) , is conce ptualize d by the majority of conte mporary social psychologists in a prescriptive and gende rspe cific fashion. Pre scriptive (or norm-base d) masculinity ide ology diffe rs from trait masculinity in that a man is conside red masculine if he believes that men should be have in ways thought to embody male role norms in his
1

We thank the following individuals for help with this study: Paul Jones, Jelani Mandara, Clyde Me ntura, E llen Scholnick, and Re n Sloan for help with data collection; Jose Luis Saiz and Tito Tricot for data collection and translation; and Terre ll Lasane and Michae l Kiphart for comments on initial drafts of the article . 2 To whom corre spondence should be addre ss at Department of Psychology, St. Marys College of Maryland, St. Marys City, MD 20686. 719
0360-0025/98/0500-0719$ 15.00/0

1998 Plenum Publishing Corporation

720

Doss an d Hopkin s

culture , whethe r he himself actually does or not. In the trait conceptualization of masculinity, on the othe r hand (e.g., Bem, 1974; Helgeson, 1994) , a man is conside red masculine only if he posse sses the characte ristics of culturally constructe d e xpe ctations about be havior appropriate for men (Le vant et al., 1992; Thompson, Pleck, & Ferrera, 1992) . Gende r-spe cific masculinity ide ology diffe rs from gende r-comparative masculinity in that the latte r focuses on characte ristics that diffe re ntiate the sexes. Gende rspe cific masculinity ideology examine s ite ms that be st characte rize men, regardle ss of a scale s ability to diffe re ntiate betwee n men and wome n (Levant et al., 1992) . This modification comes, in part, as a result of empirical evidence that masculinity ideology is related to but different from gender relations, attitudes towards women (Pleck, Sone nstein, & Ku, 1994; Thompson & Pleck, 1986), and masculine and feminine traits (Thompson, 1990). This fundame ntal shift in rese arch has prompte d researche rs to divide the construct of masculinity into m ale role norm s and m ascu linity ideology (Ple ck, Sone nstein & Ku, 1993) to re fle ct its reconce ptualization. Male role norms are culturally constructe d e xpectations about be havior and traits conside red appropriate for men. These cultural norms are determine d by both male s and females in the culture and, in fact, may differ substantially by gender within a particular culture . Male role norms would be operationalize d using agre e ment or disagre ement with stateme nts such as In my culture , it is not acceptable for men to cry. Masculinity ide ology is an individual s inte rnalize d adaptation of male role norms, differing from cultural norms in ways that minim ize that individual s ge nde r-role conflict and ge nde r-role strain (se e O Neil et al., 1986). Masculinity ideology would be operationalize d with stateme nts such as I feel that men should not cry. Unfortunate ly, although the se terms have been used for more than ten years in the psychological lite rature , the re still e xists some confusio n as to the diffe re nce be twe en stere otype s, male role norms, and masculinity ideology. Seve ral studie s use differing definitions of these concepts; for e xample , Thompson and Ple cks (1986) Male Role Norms Scale actually measure s masculinity ideology as it is defined here. It is also important to distinguish between the se various constructs be cause their hypothe size d correlate s and compone nt structure s may be different. Because masculinity ideology is adopte d from stere otype s and male role norms, it is like ly to be less traditional than the latter two. In fact, the direction of agre e ment with male ste reotype s might be comple tely opposite from an individual s masculinity ideology. Utilizing the example above , although an individual could feel that, in fact, men should cry, a male ste reotype might very will be that men do not cry. The conte mporary definition of masculinity holds that gende r role s ne gatively affe ct men in two main ways: (a) certain gende r roles are psychologically and physically maladaptive and (b) violation of gender role s leads to negative

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

721

psychological and social consequences (Ple ck, 1981). The first consequence of gender roles described above has been called gender role conflict and the second has be e n calle d gen der role strain ( O Neil, He lms, Gable , David, & Wrightsman, 1986). In this theory of gender roles, a person atte mpts to find a balance that minimizes gende r role conflict and gender role strain. Consistent with ge nder role conflict, high leve ls of maladaptive masculinity are signific antly re late d to a multitud e of diffe re nt attitude s and be haviors . Thompson, Grisanti, and Pleck (1985) found more traditional masculinity ideology to be corre lated positive ly with support for Type A behaviors, homophobic anxietie s, and unilate ral power in romantic re lationships, and negative ly re lated to personal disclosure to a fe male frie nd. Ple ck et al. (1993) found that traditional masculinity ideology was relate d to seve ral aspects of gende r re lationships. It was positive ly correlated with number of se x partne rs in the past year, support of adve rsarial re lationships with the opposite sex, and negative ly correlate d with the level of relationship intimacy at last intercourse, consiste nt condom use , and belie f in male responsibility for contrace ption. 3 Without further study, howeve r, the generalizibility of these results to cultural groups outside of the Anglo-Ame rican population in which the y were found is extremely limite d. The central idea of masculinity ideology is that male s act in the ways they do not because of the ir male role identity, or the ir level of masculine traits, but because of the conception of masculinity they internalize from the ir culture (Pleck et al., 1993, pp. 14-15) . The refore, if othe r culture s or subculture s have different male role norms, members of those culture s are also very like ly to have a differe nt form of masculinity ideology. In fact, several studie s have found diffe rences in prescriptive masculinity ideology between culture s (e.g., Pleck et al., 1994; Le vant & Majors, 1997; Levant, Wu, & Fische r, 1996; Thompson e t al., 1985) . For example , White males supporte d the Big Whe el (status) and Sturdy Oak (toughness) norms significantly more than people of other races (Thompson et al., 1985). In comparison to Anglo-Ame ricans, African-Ame ricans te nd to stress competitivene ss, aggre ssion, protection of family, success, and indepe ndence. At the same time, they are more like ly than Anglo-Ame ricans to support male expre ssions of gentle ne ss, warmth, and standing up for belie fs (Cazenave , 1984). Using a White sample as a re fe rence group, Pleck et al. (1994) found traditional scores on the ir Male Role Attitude Scale (MRAS) to be significantly re lated in a re gression analysis to being African-Ame rican. Latino-Ame rican re sponse s did not differ significantly from Anglo-Ame rican response s. African-American unde rgraduate s also score d more traditionally than Anglo3

It is re grettable to note that previous research on the behavioral correlates of masculinity ideology has focused on negative be haviors associated with traditional masculinity ideology. Re search on correlations with leade rship ability, independence, cognitive style, and achie vement would add much to the study of masculinity ideology.

722

Doss an d Hopkin s

Americans on five of the eight Male Role Norms Inventory (MRNI) subscale s (Levant & Majors, 1997). However, not all the re search points to diffe rences in masculinity ideology between culture s. Correlations between the MRAS and se veral depende nt measure s were not significantly different among Latino, African-Ame rican, or Anglo-Ame rican samples (Ple ck et al., 1993). Parke r and Kleiner (1969) also found no diffe rences in ideal male family role behaviors between AfricanAmerican and Anglo-Ame rican male s. The mixed e vidence demonstrating different definitions of masculinity has prompte d several authors (e.g., Good, Borst, & Wallace, 1994; Harris, 1994; Pleck e t al., 1993; Thompson e t al., 1992) to call for the exploration and charting of the variation and similaritie s of masculinitie s among different culture s and subculture s. The exploration, however, has bee n impe ded by methodological issues inhe rent in any research comparing differe nt culture s and subculture s. The foremost limitation on previous re se arch has be en the assumed and imposed etic (unive rsality) of the Anglo-Ame rican concept of masculinity ideolog y on to othe r cultur e s. W he n emic ( spe cific to a sin gl e cultur e ) Anglo-Ame rican masculinity items are simply re worded or translate d and used to measure masculinity in othe r culture s, it is impossible to obtain a cle ar view of possible variations in the construct. An item pool constructe d in population A and administe re d in population B might miss integral portions of masculinity ide ology in the latte r population because the y were not a part of the construct in population A (Williams & Best, 1982) . Hunte r and Davis (1992, 1994) have done exce lle nt qualitative research on African-Ame rican masculinity ideology, but unfortunate ly the ir re search has not ye t inspire d an African-Ame rican masculinity ide ology scale. In fact, to our knowle dge , the items of all the masculinity ideology scales to this point have be en e ithe r empirically or the ore tically derive d using Anglo-Ame rican sample s. Ple ck et al. (1993) acknowle dge d the Anglo-ce ntric nature of the pre se nt surve ys, stating that the use of these masculinity ide ology scale s assume s that their ite ms encompass a range of characte ristics pote ntially include d in definitions of masculinity in major U.S. subculture s (p. 17) . Some rese archers (e.g., Frijda & Jahoda, 1966) feel that, whe n attempting to identify etic compone nts of a construct, administration of a Western-base d test in othe r culture s is acce ptable . Howe ve r, whe n se archin g for e m ic diffe re nce s with in an e tic cons truct, instrume nts that are sensitive to each culture are usually necessary to obtain meaningful results (Triandis, 1972) . There fore, the challe nge to cross-cultural researche rs is to pursue their etic goals while giving appropriate conside ration to e mic com pone nts that may re quire the modifica tion of rese arch procedure s . . . (Williams & Be st, 1982, p. 36) .

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

723

The purpose of this study is to pre sent the Multicultural Masculinity Ideology Scale (MMIS) and e vidence for its validity. To permit an e xploration and comparison of varied cultural masculinitie s, we constructe d a prescriptive and gender-spe cific masculinity ideology scale using items that were initially se lected on theoretical grounds to re prese nt diffe rent culture s and then empirically teste d in Chile an, African-Ame rican, and Anglo-Ame rican culture s. This study uses four of the five procedure s presented by Cronbach and Me ehl (1955) to examine construct validity: factor analysis, group differe nce s, inte rnal-consistency reliability, and test-retest reliability. These four methods, along with a crite rion measure of self-reporte d behavior, allowe d for the testing of se veral sets of hypothe ses. First, we hypothe size d that the MMIS would be encompassing enough to yield a strong factor structure common to each culture. The common factor(s) would be relative ly invariant across culture s, allowing for comparison of masculinity ideology betwe en culture s. We also hypothe size d that the MMIS would reve al factors specific to each culture , creating a scale that would be useful not only in e xamining masculinity ideology across culture s, but within a single culture as well. Second, we hypothe sized that seve ral group differe nce s would be found. Specifically, we hypothe sized that men more than women, service -acade my students more than students attending a small liberal arts colle ge , and younger more than olde r students would respond in a manne r more closely re sembling the culture s male role norms. Third, we hypothe sized that the test-retest reliability and the internalconsiste ncy re liability (alpha) for each culture would be acceptably high. Finally, we hypothesize d that the individual ideologie s expre ssed on the MMIS would predict an individual s self-reported behavior in a priori directions.

METHOD Participan ts A total of 769 unde rgraduate stude nts (503 men and 299 wome n) represe nting three distinct cultural or subcultural groups participate d in this proje ct. O nly male s were use d in the construction of the MMIS and, exce pt where note d, in the validation of the scale. All participants complete d the study as volunte e rs, e ithe r as part of their class requireme nts or for extra credit. The 190 Chilean participants (157 men and 33 wome n) were obtained from two public urban unive rsitie s in the central and southe rn regions of Chile . The 296 African-Ame rican participants (148 men, 148 wome n) were obtaine d primarily from three predominantly African-Ame rican institutions in the Mid-Atlantic re gion. A subse t ( n = 37) of the African-Ame rican participants atte nde d pre dominantl y Caucasian unive rsitie s; their re sponse s were compare d and then aggre gate d into the total African-Ame rican sample

724

Doss an d Hopkin s Table I. Demographic Characteristics of the Total Sample and the Equal-N Sample a Total Sample Chilean White 283 58 42 20 33 27 17 20 36 22 16 19 2 18 33 9 11 6 22 $70,000 Black 296 50 50 19 11 65 6 9 47 25 16 10 1 19 22 8 27 5 17 $50,000 E qual-N Sample Chilean 148 100 White 148 100 Black 148 100

Number Gende r % Men % Women Age (median) Religion % Catholic % Protestent % Other % No religion Year in college % First year % Second ye ar % Third year % Fourth year % Fifth year or gre ater College major Natural science Social science Arts Business Engineering Unde cide d/other Family income (Median)
a b

190 87 13 21 69 6 7 13 20 34 21 12 2 3 6 0 21 58 1 N/A b

21
68 5 8 14 20 32 22 14 2

20
36 24 18 21 28 26 18 20 6

19
11 59 8 13 29 32 22 14 2

2 3 0 22 62 1 N/A b

19 31 6 15 10 19 $80,000

11 17 14 31 9 16 $50,000

Pe rcentage s in some categories do not add to 100 be cause of missing data. Chilean median income was not included because of an extre mely low rate of response.

because no significant differe nce s in masculinity ideology were found. The 283 Anglo-Ame rican participants (165 men and 118 wome n) were obtained from two large , public, urban unive rsitie s, a small libe ral arts colle ge , a military service acade my (all in the Mid-Atlantic region), and a large , public, urban unive rsity on the West Coast. More detaile d demographic information for the thre e subsample s is presented in Table I. Con struction of Items From a review of the psychological and sociological lite rature on Hispanic masculinity, 4 African-Am erican masculinity, 5 and Anglo-A merican
Andrade, 1992; De Le on, 1993; Harris, 1994; Kauth, Mar n de Magallanes, & Leone de Quintana, 1993; Mar n & Mar n, 1991; Sonenste in, Pleck, & Ku, 1991; Stolen, 1991; Strong, McQ uillen, & Hughe y, 1994; Williams & Be st, 1982, 1990; Z elnik & Shah, 1983. 5 Cazenave, 1984; Franklin, 1986, 1988, 1994a, 1994b; Harris, Torres, & Allender, 1994; Harris, 1992, 1995; Hunter & Davis, 1992, 1994; Majors & Billson, 1992; Majors, Tyler, Pede n, & Hall, 1994; Parker & Kleiner, 1969; Roberts, 1994; Sonenstein et al., 1991; Staples, 1978; Ze lnik & Shah, 1983.
4

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

725

masculinity, 6 a set of pre scriptive and gende r-spe cific masculinity ideology items was sele cted for deve lopme nt of the MMIS in the thre e culture s. The body of literature revie wed utilize d both qualitative and quantitative methods. Although several sources (e .g., Sone nstein et al., 1991; Williams & Be st, 1990) dire ctly compare d two or more culture s, most sources e xplore d masculinity in one particular culture . From this lite rature , items were selected if they e ithe r: (a) represe nted a central aspe ct of masculinity in one or more culture s or (b) were like ly to differe ntiate one cultural group from anothe r. A detaile d chart was the n constructe d with the se lected compone nt of masculinity and its sugge sted cultural differe nce or similarity. From this chart, 39 masculinity ide ology items were formulate d. Ite ms were care fully sele cted to equally re pre se nt feature s of masculinity in each cultural group. In addition to masculinity ideology items, be havioral items were constructe d. The be havior items were develope d to tap aspe cts of behavior directly re lated to each masculinity ideology que stion. For e xample, one masculinity ide ology item was Guys should not cry even when some thing bad happe ns ; the corresponding self-report be havior item was I do not cry when something bad happe ns to me or my love d ones. Procedures The initial version of the MMIS and its corre sponding behavioral items were scored on a five -point Like rt scale format, with 1 be ing anchore d at strongly disagre e and 5 at strongly agre e . Participants were instructe d to read e ach item and decide how much the y agre ed or disagre ed that the state ment represented the ir pe rsonal views of how men their age were supposed to act. Both masculinity and be havioral ite ms were randomly chosen for reverse -coding to pre ve nt acquie scence . In addition to the MMIS and the corresponding behavioral questions, a se lf-report section was administe red including a 6-ite m short form of the Marlowe -Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Fische r & Fick, 1993) and the 25-ite m Se lf-Monitoring Scale 7 (Snyde r, 1974). As part of the validation of the MMIS, the Male Role Norms Scale (Thompson & Pleck, 1986) and the Male Role Attitude s Scale (Ple ck e t al., 1993) were imbe dde d into the masculinity section of the questionnaire for 55 male participants in the Anglo-Ame rican sample . In all sample s, the masculinity and se lf-report sections were counte rbalance d to prevent systematic priming effects due to orde r of administration; te sts for
6

Komarovsky, 1976; Le vant et al., 1992; Pleck e t al., 1993, 1994; Sattel, 1976; Sonenste in et al., 1991; Thompson e t al., 1985; Thompson & Pleck, 1986; Williams & Best, 1982, 1990; Ze lnik & Shah, 1983. 7 The Self-Monitoring Scale was administe red as part of another study; its re sults will not be re ported here.

726

Doss an d Hopkin s

this e ffe ct reve ale d no significant differe nces. To re duce the pote ntial priming e ffects of the demographic questions, the short demographic se ction was always include d last. Finally, anonymity, assure d in the cover le tter, was guarante ed by having the participants seal the ir response s in envelope s and drop them into a large box. Four ite ms (along with their corresponding behavior que stions) that did not meet criteria describe d be low for inclusion on any of the etic or emic compone nts were eliminate d from the final scale . The final ve rsion of the MMIS is reproduce d in Appendix A; the corresponding be havioral que stions are include d in Appe ndix B. The MMIS, behavioral items, and all instructions were inde pe nde ntly translate d into Spanish by two bilingual, native Chile ans. The two translations were compare d with each othe r and, after lengthy discussion, corrected to create the final translation. Questionn aires Male Ro le Norm s Scale. T he Mal e Role Norm s Scal e ( MR NS) (Thompson & Ple ck, 1986) is a measure designe d to tap constructs of masculinity ide ology. The 26 ite ms are an abbre viate d form of the Brannon Masculinity Scale , Short Form (Brannon, 1985, as cited in Thompson & Ple ck, 1986) . The MRNS was constructe d and validate d on a sample of predominantly Anglo-Ame rican stude nts ( n = 400 men) at two New England libe ral arts institutions. The authors use d a principal-comp one nt solution with obliqu e rotatio n and re porte d thre e -compone nts: Status, Anti-fe mininity, and Toughne ss. The re porte d alpha coe fficients for the three compone nts were .81, .76, and .74, re spe ctive ly. The alpha coe fficients for the MRNS in the curre nt study for a subse t of the Anglo-Ame rican population ( n = 55) were .81, .71, and .83, respectively. Male Role Attitu des Scale . The Male Role Attitude s Scale (MRAS) (Ple ck e t al., 1993) consists of 7 items from the MRNS se lected to re pre se nt its compone nt structure . In addition, the MRAS include s a sex item from the Ste reotype s About Male Se xuality Scale (Sne ll, Belk, & Hawkins, 1986, as cited in Ple ck et al., 1993). The MRAS was validate d on a racially dive rse sample of adole scent male s. The authors reporte d alpha coefficients of .61 for an Anglo-Ame rican sample , .47 for an African-Ame rican sample , and .54 for a Latino-Ame rican sample . In a subse t of the Anglo-Ame rican sample in the curre nt study, the alpha coefficie nt was .68. Marlowe-Crown e Social Desirability Scale. A short form of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (SDS) (Crowne & Marlowe , 1960) was used to te st for cultural diffe rence s in social desirability and to e xamine the dive rge nt validity of the MMIS. The 6-ite m X2 re vise d short form (Fishe r & Fick, 1993) of the SDS was re porte d to have a goodne ss-of-fit

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

727

inde x to the original scale of .99 and an alpha coefficient of .76. Howe ver, the alpha coe fficients obtaine d in the prese nt study were notably lower: .39 in the Chile an sample , .47 in the Anglo-Ame rican sample , and .46 in the African-Ame rican sample . As a re sult, all results using this scale should be interpre te d with caution. Isolation of Com pon ents To isolate etic compone nts, a subse t of male participants e qually re prese ntative of each culture s sample ( n = 444, 148 from each culture ) was se le cte d. This e qual-n sample consiste d of all 148 African-A me rican males, and 148 Chile an males and 148 Anglo-Ame rican male s randomly selected from the large r sample s of participants in the se latte r two culture s. Missing data, le ss then three percent in e ve ry culture , were replace d with the median re sponse for the particular cultural group. The re sponse s to all items were factor analyze d using principal-compo ne nts analysis. Components were conside red e tic if the y were represente d in the e qual-n sample as well as in each culture .

RESULTS Isolation an d Validation of Etic Com pon ents A principal-comp onents analysis was pe rformed on the MMIS in the equal-n sample and in sample s from each culture individually. An examination of the scree plots reve ale d a strong two-compone nt solution plus an additional one to thre e weaker compone nts in each culture . The first two compone nts appe ared to represent the same construct in all thre e culture s as well as the equal-n sample ; therefore , a two-compone nt structure was e xtracte d within e ach sample . As the corre lation betwe en etic components was low, r(443) = .05, ns, a varimax rotation was pe rformed. Items were include d on these common (e tic) compone nts if (a) the y loade d on a compone nt gre ate r than .40 in the equal-n sample and (b) the y loade d on that same compone nt .25 or greate r in e very culture separate ly. This proce ss resulted in two etic compone nts that were consiste nt across culture s: a 13-ite m compone nt of Hypermasculine Posturing and an 8-ite m compone nt of Achie ve ment. These etic compone nts are presente d in Table II and Table III, respectively. The two etic compone nts accounte d for 27% of the variance in the equal-n sample (22% in the Chile an sample , 36% in the Anglo-Ame rican sample , and 27% in the African-Ame rican sample ). Additionally, one -sample t-tests to determine departure from neutrality re-

728

Table II. Etic Compone nt 1: Hype rmasculine Posturing a Total .67 .66 .62 .61 .58 .57 .49 .48 .48 .44 .43 .41 .40 (.31) .44 .31 .65 .47 .60 .25 .29 .31 .48 .47 .56 .38 Chile Anglo-Am African-Am .78 .75 .76 .62 .74 .54 .62 .60 .61 .44 .46 .43 .48 .56 .64 .45 .60 .60 .54 .42 (.29) .44 .55 .49 .44 .29

04 A guy should prove his masculinity by having sex with a lot of people. 31 A guy should have se xual intercourse as early as he can in his life. 21 Guys should not cry eve n when something really bad happens. 11 In a relationship, guys should have sexual intercourse as often as possible. 20 A guy should always have a woman he is dating. 12 To be a guy, youve got to be tough. 19 E ven if a guy is not rich, he should try to look that way. 15 A guy should not show affe ction to those he love s. 03 A guy should not have male friends who are homose xual. 25 The be st way a man can care for his family is to get the highest paying job he can. 13 Strong anger is a natural emotion for a guy to show. 30 Being athle tic or good at a sport should be important for a guy. 05 Guys should not try to solve problems by fighting. Me an item score : 2.52 Standard deviation: 0.59

Item No.

Masculinity Ide ology Item

Numbers in pare ntheses indicate that the item, although loading higher on another component, still loaded above .25 on the Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt. Doss an d Hopkin s

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale Table III. Etic Component 2: Achieve ment Item No. Masculinity Ideology Item Total .62 .62 .60 .58 .55 .54 Chile .54 .62 .42 .50 (.40) .36 AngloAm .70 .59 .61 .52 .56 .60

729

28 E ven when things ge t really difficult, a guy should keep trying. 16 A guy should put his best e ffort into e very part of his life. 10 A guy should be confident in e verything he does. 09 Guys should have a positive attitude towards life and not let things ge t them down. 26 Guys should be compe titive. 14 A guy should have long-term goals for his life. 33 A guy should take risks to reach his goals. 24 A man should not always have to protect his family. Mean item score : 4.09 Standard deviation: 0.54
a

AfricanAm .70 .70 .71 .71 .46 .62

.41

.51

.41

.52

.39

.48

.47

.49

Numbers in parenthese s indicate that the item, although loading higher on anothe r component, still loade d above .25 on the Achie vement component.

vealed that, on ave rage , men in all three cultural groups score d in the dire ction of disagre e ment ( M = 2.52) with the Hype rmasculine Posturing compone nt, t(443) = 16.46, p < .001, and agre ement ( M = 4.09) with the Achie ve ment compone nt, t(443) = 43.36, p < .001. The re were no significant cultural diffe rence s in total compone nt scores on either of the two etic compone nts. Agreement or disagre e ment with a compone nt should not be confuse d with acce pte nce or reje ction of the validity of these masculinity ide ology dime nsions. The se dime nsions are pre sumed to re flect cultural ste reotype s and male role norms. Rathe r, le ve l of agre ement or disagre ement is a re flection of the masculinity ide ology, that is, modification of the se male stereotype s and male role norms by a group of individuals. Reliability. The Hype rmasculine Posturing and Achie ve ment components both had acceptable alpha coe fficients. The Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt had an alpha coefficie nt of .81 in the equal-n sample (.72 in the Chile an sample , .88 in the Anglo-Ame rican sample , and .76 in the African-Ame rican sample ). The Achievement compone nt, with fe wer items, had an alpha coefficie nt of .72 in the e qual-n sample (.60 in the Chile an sample , .73 in the Anglo-Ame rican sample , and .79 in the African-Ame rican sample ). The three -week test-re test reliability, as measure d in a subse t of participants who were predominantly Anglo-Ame rican, was .98 for the Hype rmasculine Posturing compone nt and .82 for the Achieve ment compone nt. Contrasted G roups. We hypothe sized that men would score significantly highe r than women on both etic compone nts. This hypothe sis was based

730

Doss an d Hopkin s

on the sex-role strain mode l (Ple ck, 1981) and the discre pancy-strain mode l of masculinity (Le vant, 1996; Pleck, 1995) in which men e xpe rience ge nder-role strain if they deviate from cultural norms of masculinity. Women, howe ve r, are not bound by cultural definitions of male role norms and would not e xpe rience this gende r-role strain. In fact, significant diffe re nces were found on the compone nt score for Hypermasculine Posturing be tween men and women in eve ry culture , with men scoring highe r ( p < .001) . In the Anglo-Ame rican culture , men more than women e ndorse d the Achievement compone nt, t(281) = 3.74, p < .001, although no significant diffe rence s were found in the two othe r cultural groups. Based on previous re search (Le vant e t al., 1992) , we also hypothe sized that first- and second-ye ar stude nts would score highe r than third- and fourth-ye ar stude nts on the Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt. We hypothe size d that scores on the Achieve ment compone nt would not be significantly diffe re nt by ye ar in colle ge be cause , for colle ge stude nts, the Achievement standards are not as maladaptive as the Hype rmasculine Posturing standards. Significant diffe re nces were found in the e qual-n sample betwe en a grouping of first- and second-ye ar stude nts and a grouping of third- and fourth-ye ar stude nts on the Hype rmasculine Posturing compone nt, with first-and se cond-ye ar stude nts scoring highe r, t( 443) = 2.71, p < .01. No significant differe nces base d on year in school were found on the Achieve ment compone nt, as expe cted. We also hypothe sized that male s at a military service acade my, in comparison to males at a small, libe ral arts colle ge, would more strongly endor se the H yp e rmasculin e Postur in g compon e nt. We postulate d this diffe re nce be cause we fe lt that the male role norms in the service acade my would be more supportive of Hypermasculine Posturing than the male role norms at the libe ral arts colle ge in the same region. We also hypothe sized that male s who support the Hype rmasculine Posturing norms would more like ly enroll in a service acade my than a libe ral arts colle ge. Howe ve r, no significant differe nce s were found on the Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt betwee n a small numbe r of stude nts at the service acade my (n = 25) and stude nts at a small, libe ral arts colle ge (n = 63). Self-Reported Behavior. Scores on both etic compone nts were compare d with the aggre gate score s on a batte ry of se lf-reporte d be havior items administe red in the same que stionnaire packe t and scored on the same Likert-scale format. The mean correlation be tween the compone nt score and the total score on the corresponding subse t of be havior items in the three culture s was .40 for the Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt ( df = 465, p < .001) and .37 for the Achievement compone nt ( df = 465, p < .001) . After accounting for the variance associate d with age , re ligion, and culture in a re gression analysis, the Hype rmasculine Posturing compone nt was also

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

731

significant ly pre dictive of se lf-re porte d numbe r of life time se x partne rs ( beta = .13, p < .01) as well as numbe r of sex partne rs in the past twelve months ( beta = .25, p < .001) in the equal-n sample . Correlations with Previously Publish ed Masculinity Ideology Scales. Correlations with other masculinity ide ology scale s were examine d as a te st of construct validity. We hypothe size d that the compone nts of the MMIS would be corre late d in a priori directions with corre sponding compone nts or total score s on pre viously validate d scale s. Howe ver, be cause the se scale s had be en validate d using Anglo-Ame rican sample s, we re stricted the comparisons between the MMIS and other scales to the Anglo-Ame rican sample . We hypothe sized that the Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt would be corre lated positive ly with all three factors Status, Anti-fe mininity, and Toughne ssof the Male Role Norms Scale (Thompson & Pleck, 1986) because Hypermasculine Posturing include s all three aspe cts of masculinity. We also postulate d that the Achie ve ment compone nt would be corre lated positive ly with the Status factor. As predicted, Hypermasculine Posturing was significantly corre late d with the Anti-femininity, r(121) = .33, p < .001, Status, r(121) = .28, p < .01, and Toughne ss, r(121) = .25, p < .01, factors of the Male Role Norms Scale . The Achie vement compone nt was significantly correlate d with only the Status factor, r(121) = .47, p < .001, as predicted. We also hypothe size d that both the Hype rmasculine Posturing and Achievement compone nts of the MMIS would correlate positive ly with the total score on the e ight-ite m Male Role Attitude s Scale (MRAS) (Pleck e t al., 1993), be cause both scales tap overlapping dimensions of masculinity ideology. Correlations betwe en the MRAS and the Hype rmasculine Posturing compone nt, r(121) = .60, p < .001, and Achievement compone nt, r(121) = .49, p < .001, were both significant. Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale (SDS). The re vise d X2 short form of the SDS (Fisher & Fisk, 1993) was include d to e xamine the e ffe cts of socially de sirable re sponding on the compone nt structure s and score s. Correlations be tween the short form of the Marlowe -Crowne SDS and etic compone nts were very small ( r = .13 betwe en Hypermasculine Posturing and SDS, and r = .05 betwee n Achievement and SDS). None of the corre lations be twe e n the SDS and the 8 Achie ve me nt compone nt ite ms reached significance . Howe ver, corre lations be twee n the Marlowe -Crowne and 3 of the 13 the Hype rmasculine Posturing items did re ach conve ntional significance le ve ls, although no corre lations were above .15. As a re sult, the corre lation be tween the SDS and the Hypermasculine Posturing compone nt re ached significance le vels, r(465) = .13, p < .01. Howeve r, because of the low numbe r of ite m corre lations and the large numbe r of study participants, we be lie ve that the results from administration of the Mar-

732

Doss an d Hopkin s

lowe-Crowne indicate that the MMIS is not unduly affected by socially desirable response tende ncie s. The low corre lations also indicate dive rge nt validity for the MMIS. Em ic Com ponents Isolation of Em ic Com pon ents. Emic compone nts were isolate d by performing a principal-comp one nts analysis in sample s from each culture separately. Scree plots were e xamine d and the indicate d numbe r of compone nts extracte d. The corre lations betwee n compone nts were small e nough ( r < .20) (Tabachnick & Fide ll, 1983) in the African-Ame rican and Chile an samples to use an orthogonal varimax rotation. Howe ver, be cause of highe r corre lations be twe e n compone nts in the Anglo-Am e rican sample , an oblique rotation was used in that sample only. O nly items that loade d .30 or greater were retaine d as emic compone nt items. Compone nts were considere d emic if the y met the following conditions: (a) they had four or more items loading .30 or gre ater; (b) they were inte rpretable as constructs of masculinity; and (c) the y tappe d an aspe ct of masculinity diffe rent from the two e tic compone nts. This process re ve ale d three emic compone nts in the Chile an sample , and one compone nt e ach in the Anglo-Ame rican and African-Ame rican sample s. These e mic compone nts and the ir validation are discusse d in more detail by culture be low. Chilean Validation. The three compone nts to e merge in the Chile an sample were Toughne ss, Pose , and Responsibility. (See Table IV.) The 8item Toughne ss compone nt had an alpha coe fficient of .59. O n ave rage , the participan ts disagre e d ( M = 2.68) with the Toughne ss compone nt, t(156) = 7.55, p < .001. The score on the Toughne ss compone nt was significantly correlate d, r(145) = .42, p < .001, with a total score on correspon din g be havior ite m s. Add ition ally, as hypo the size d, the re we re significant gende r diffe re nces on the Toughne ss compone nt, with men scoring highe r than wome n, t(178) = 3.7, p < .001. The 5-ite m Pose compone nt had an alpha coefficient of .58. It was hypothe size d that men would agre e more strongly with the pre scriptions of the Pose compone nt; in fact, me n score d signific antly highe r than women, t(178) = 2.2, p < .05. However, mean response s also indicate d that men disagre e d ( M = 1.85) with the compone nt, t(156) = 24.81, p < .001. The Pose compone nt was also significantly correlate d with the total score on corre sponding behavioral ite ms, r(152) = .23, p < .01. The Responsibility compone nt was significantly corre late d with the total score on a set of corre sponding be havioral items, r(141) = .39, p < .001. As hypothe size d, wome n e ndorse d the Responsibility compone nt more strongly than men, t(178) = 4.0, p < .001. Men, on ave rage , agre ed

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale Table IV. Chilean Emic Components

733

Compone nt Loadings Toughness 05 Guys should not try to solve problems by fighting. 17 Courage should not be a necessary part of being a guy. 12 To be a guy, you ve got to be tough. 13 Strong anger is a natural emotion to show. 06 Providing for his family should be a man s main goal in life. 25 The be st way a man can care for his family is to get the highe st paying job he can. 21 Guys should not cry even when something really bad happens. 23 In a relationship, guys should have se xual intercourse before having oral se x. Me an item score: 2.68 SD .53 Pose 15 A guy should not show affection to those he love s. 19 E ven if a guy is not rich, he should try to look that way. 04 A guy should prove his masculinity by having se x with a lot of people. 32 Showing emotion is not a sign of weakness in a guy. 24 A man should not always have to protect his family. Me an item score: 1.85 SD: .58 Re sponsibility 29 A guy should not look for dange r just for the thrill of it. 27 A guy should have sexual intercourse only in emotionally committe d re lationships. 34 For a guy, sexual intercourse should not be the goal of making out. 08 A guy should look for a date who has a good personality rather than one who is really good looking. 14 A guy should have long-term goals for his life. Me an item score: 3.43 SD: .56

.58 .56 .46 .45 .43 .39 .31

.35

.71 .61 .56

.51 .39

.61 .54 .45 .44 .36

(M = 3.43) with the Responsibility compone nt, t(156) = 9.53, p < .001. The Responsibility compone nt was also significantly predictive of fe wer se lfreporte d life time sex partne rs ( beta = .22, p < .05) after accounting for religion and age in a regre ssion analysis. However, contrary to predictions, it was not significantly relate d to the numbe r of sex partne rs in the past 12 months. Because the Responsibility compone nt had a low alpha coefficient (.48), it is que stionable whe the r separate compone nt scores should be reporte d for this compone nt. Howeve r, the Responsibility compone nt was include d in the final scale because it showe d good construct and crite rion validity and may re prese nt an important compone nt of masculinity ideology in Chile an culture . Anglo-Am erican Validation. The only emic compone nt to e merge in the Anglo-Ame rican sample was a 6-ite m Sensitivity compone nt, with an alpha coefficient of .70. (See Table V.) O n ave rage , men agre ed ( M = 3.46) with the compone nt, t(164) = 8.96, p < .001. As e xpected, women agre ed more strongly than men with the Sensitivity compone nt, t(281) = 7.5, p < .001.

734 Table V. Anglo-American E mic Component Sensitivity Pattern Loadings .66 .59

Doss an d Hopkin s

22 A guy doesn t have to be aggressive to ge t what he wants out of life. 29 A guy should not look for dange r just for the thrill of it. 35 A guy should be independent and not get too attached to others. 02 A guy should let people know how he feels. 15 A guy should not show affection to those he love s. 05 Guys should not try to solve problems by fighting. Mean item score : 3.46 SD: .66

Structure Loadings .64 .56

.54 .52 .41

.53

.62 .61 .49

.61

The Sensitivity compone nt also was significantly corre lated with the total score on corre sponding behavioral ite ms among men, r (162) = .36, p < .001. African-Am erican Validation. The single emic compone nt in the African-Ame rican sample was Sexual Re sponsibility, with only 4 ite ms. (See Table V I.) As hypothe size d, the e mic Se xual Responsibility compone nt showe d a large gende r differe nce , with women more than men agre e ing with the compone nt, t(294) = 7.5, p < .001. Me ns ave rage re sponse s ( M = 2.92) did not indicate strong agre ement or disagre ement with the compone nt, t(147) = 1.48, ns. The compone nt also showe d a mode st but significant corre lation with the total score for the corre sponding be havioral que stions, r(145) = .17, p < .05. After accounting for religion and age in a re gression analysis, this emic compone nt was significantly predictive of the se lf-reporte d numbe r of sex partne rs in the past 12 months ( beta = .19, p < .05). Contrary to our prediction, it was not significantly relate d to the numbe r of life time se x partne rs. The 4-ite m Sexual Responsibility compone nt had a low alpha coe fficient of .43. We include d this compone nt because it had a high e ige nvalue (2.09), and be cause the low alpha coe fficie nt and mode st corre lation with corre sponding se lf-re port be havior items were probably influe nced by the small numbe r of items on the comTable VI. African-American E mic Compone nt Sexual Re sponsibility Component Loadings: .64 .51 .49 .37

27 A guy should have sexual intercourse only in emotionally committed relationships. 34 For a guy, se xual intercourse should not be the goal of making out. 23 In a re lationship, guys should have sexual intercourse before having oral sex. 22 A guy doe sn t have to be aggressive to get what he wants out of life. Mean item score: 2.92 SD: .67

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

735

pone nt. Howe ver, caution should be use d when inte rpreting scores on the Sexual Responsibility compone nt.

DISCUSSION Cross-cultural examination of masculinity ideology using the Multicultural Masculinity Ide ology Scale yields two core compone nts, Hypermasculine Posturing and Achievement, which are highly similar across the three culture s sample d in this study. In addition, the study re veals compone nts of masculinity ideology that are spe cific to e ach culture . Howeve r, in the context of current conceptualizations of masculinity ide ology, the commonalitie s betwee n culture s were perhaps more striking than the differe nces. These commonalitie s could be see n as supporting the e arlie r male role identity mode l postulating the e xistence of an inhe rent concept of maleness in e very man, regardle ss of othe r cultural influe nce s (se e Pleck, 1981, 1995) . Howeve r, we be lie ve that the commonalitie s betwee n culture s most like ly refle ct the effe cts of We stern culture and othe r common e xpe rience s of these participants. For e xample , the re are common media and religious base s in all three culture s, and all of the participants were atte nding colle ge. This view is supporte d by noting that the compone nts in Chile , the most diffe rent of the three culture s, have the lowe st alpha coe fficients and pe rcent of explaine d variance . It is also important to recognize that a mean score in the disagre e ment range on a compone nt doe s not imply that compone nt is meaningle ss. In fact, a score in the disagre e ment range indicate s that men s masculinity ideology is that men should act in ways opposite to those represented on the compone nt. The MMIS demonstrate s good psychome tric prope rties. The alpha coefficie nts for the e tic compone nts exceed .70 for e very sample except for the Achieve ment compone nt in Chile , which has an alpha coefficient of .60. Conve rgent validity tests de monstrate that the MMIS is correlated with two othe r scales of masculinity ideology in e xpe cted directions. Each compone nt of the MMIS is also significantly correlate d, in a priori dire ctions, with se lf-re porte d be havior ite ms. In addition, group differe nce s be tween men and wome n were in hypothe size d directions, as were differe nces between a grouping of first- and se cond-ye ar stude nts and a grouping of thirdand fourth-ye ar stude nts. The diffe re nces betwe en men and wome n, in fact, were so large and consiste nt across culture s that re se archers conducting future research on masculinity ideology should care fully conside r their rationale for combining the response s of men and women without first e xamining mean and compone nt diffe rences betwee n the m.

736

Doss an d Hopkin s

Seve ral limitations of the MMIS should also be note d. Although an atte mpt was made to create masculinity ideology que stions e qually representative of e ach culture , it was not possible to write items that tappe d eve ry aspe ct of masculinity ide ology in the literature re viewed. Furthe rmore , the literature on masculinity ideology cannot be conside red an e xhaustive surve y in any culture e xamine d. The re fore , the se compone nts should not be conside red an e xhaustive surve y of masculinity ideology constructs. Additionally, as already mentione d, two of the emic compone nts have alpha coe fficients in the .40s. As a re sult, furthe r studie s using the MMIS should use these two compone nt score s with caution. O ther limitations of this study include the e xclusive use of self-report measure s and the lack of true back-translation. Also, as is true with any study using colle ge sample s, the results of this study may not be generalizable to non-colle ge populations within a culture . This caution is especially note worthy in culture s in which colle ge attendance is not the norm. The results may also not generalize to age groups be yond early adulthood. Jung s (1931/1953) theory of age change s in pe rsonality include d the notion that men and women show more integration of their pe rsonalitie s afte r age 40, including more balance d sex-role expre ssions. Seve ral studie s (e.g., Cazenave , 1984; Gutmann, 1975; Hyde, Krajnik, & Skuldt-Nie derbe rger, 1991; Levant e t al., 1992) indicate that olde r men are less rigid in their adhe rence to ge nder-role e xpe ctations than younge r men. Subse quent cohorts have also be en shown to be less stere otypical in the ir gende r role norms (Ganote , 1997) . Finally, the Chile an standards of masculinity should not be generalize d to Latino groups in the Unite d State s or othe r cultural groups in Ce ntral or South America. The MMIS may be used in future rese arch to e xamine masculinity ideology both within and across culture s. More studie s should be conducte d in othe r culture s to examine the ge ne ralizability of the etic compone nts to culture s othe r than those presented here. Especially illuminating would be examinations of the etic compone nts in non-We ste rn culture s. Lazur and Majors (1995) , for example , offe r an important discussion about masculinity issues in Asian-Ame rican and American-Indian, as well as African-Ame rican and Latino-Ame rican, populations. Within a particular culture , attitudinal and be haviora l corre late s of masculinity ide ology ne e d furthe r exploration, e spe cially in those culture s and subculture s in which the re has bee n little or no quantitative rese arch on masculinity ideology. Cohort, age , and ge nde r differe nce s in masculinity ide ology should also be examine d in gre ate r detail. Within culture s, scoring both the e tic and e mic compone nts may be use ful. Both etic and e mic compone nt score s can be compare d to our data and to othe r variable s as furthe r che cks on conve rge nt validity. Across culture s, rese archers could use the MMIS to examine cultural vari-

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

737

ation in masculinity ide ology by scoring both etic and emic compone nts. In addition, by using a scale that has consiste nt compone nts across culture s, rese archers could examine how correlate s of masculinity ide ology differ by culture . We be lie ve the Multicultural Masculinity Ide ology Scale offe rs some important advantage s over othe r existing scales for re se archers intere sted in the se and othe r issues. It was de rived from e mpirical and non-e mpirical lite rature addre ssing issues of masculinity in Latino and African-Ame rican, as well as Anglo-Am erican, culture s. Furthe rmore , 769 colle ge stude nts from 11 institutions on two contine nts have contribute d data bearing on issues of re liability, validity, and cultural and gende r variation on the scale .

APPENDIX A Multicu ltural Masculinity Ideology Scale 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Guys should be courteous to women. A guy should le t pe ople know how he fee ls. A guy should not have male friends who are homose xual. A guy should prove his masculinity by having sex with a lot of people . Guys should not try to solve proble ms by fighting. Providing for his family should be a man s main goal in life. Male frie nds should not show affection to e ach othe r. A guy should look for a date who has a good personality rathe r than one who is really good looking. Guys should have a positive attitude towards life and not le t things ge t them down. A guy should be confide nt in eve rything he does. In a relationship, guys should have sexual intercourse as often as possible . To be a guy, you ve got to be tough. Strong ange r is a natural emotion for a guy to show. A guy should have long-te rm goals for his life . A guy should not show affe ction to those he love s. A guy should put his best e ffort into e very part of his life. Courage should not be a necessary part of be ing a guy. Being a virgin should not be an e mbarrassme nt to a guy. Even if a guy is not rich, he should try to look that way. A guy should always have a woman he is dating. Guys should not cry e ve n when something re ally bad happe ns.

738

Doss an d Hopkin s

22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

A guy doe sn t have to be aggre ssive to ge t what he wants out of life . In a re lationship, guys should have se xual intercourse be fore having oral se x. A man should not always have to prote ct his family. The be st way a man can care for his family is to get the highe st paying job he can. Guys should be compe titive . A guy should have sexual intercourse only in emotionally committed re lationships. Even when things ge t really difficult, a guy should kee p trying. A guy should not look for dange r just for the thrill of it. Being athle tic or good at a sport should be important for a guy. A guy should have sexual intercourse as early as he can in his life . Showing e motion is not a sign of weakne ss in a guy. A guy should take risks to re ach his goals. For a guy, se xual intercourse should not be the goal of making out. A guy should be inde pe nde nt and not ge t too attache d to othe rs.

APPENDIX B Corresponding Behavior Questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. I am courte ous to wome n my age . I usually do not le t othe rs know how I am fee ling. I would be able to have a good male frie nd who was homose xual. Having a lot of se x partne rs would make me fee l really good about myse lf. When I am mad at someone , I am like ly to fight. Providing for my family will be my main goal in life. I hug my close guy frie nds. My date s looks are more important to me than her pe rsonality. I have trouble kee ping a positive attitude towards life . In difficult situations, I am confide nt about my ability. O nce I have had sexual intercourse with some one, I usually have se xual intercourse with that pe rson as ofte n as possible . In difficult times, I try to be tough. I do not get very angry at people whe n the y do some thing mean to me.

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

739

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

I do not have a good idea what I want to do for the re st of my life . I show affection towards people I love . I put my best e ffort into everything I do. I try to block out fe ar be cause it only gets in the way. I don t (or didn t) ke ep my virginity a se cret. I buy or wear stuff to make me look richer than I actually am. I don t go longe r than a month betwee n relationships. I do not cry whe n something bad happe ns to me or my love d one s. When I want something, I use aggre ssive ways to get it. In a re lationship, I have oral se x be fore having se xual inte rcourse . When I am married, I will do almost anything to prote ct my family. The main way I plan to care for my family is to ge t the highe st paying job I can. I am not compe titive with othe rs. I have sexual intercourse only in emotionally committed re lationships. When my goals see m very hard to re ach, I don t try to re ach the m. I look for dange r just for the thrill of it. I am not athle tic or good at a sport. I had (or will have ) se xual intercourse at my first opportunity. I don t show e motion because it would mean that I was weak. When the re is some thing I want, I will take risks to get it. I am not satisfie d with sexual activity if it doesn t include sexual intercourse . I ask for help whe n I ne ed it.

REFERENCES
Andrade, A. R. (1992) . Machismo: A unive rsal malady. Journal of American Culture, 15 , 33-41. Bem, S. (1974) . The me asurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42 , 155-162. Cazenave , N. A. (1984) . Race, socioeconomic status, and age: The social context of Ame rican masculinity. Sex Roles, 11 , 639-656. Constantinople, A. (1973) . Masculinity-femininity: An e xce ption to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80 , 389-407. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) . Construct validity in psychological te sts. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960) . A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349-354.

740

Doss an d Hopkin s

De Le on, B. (1993) . Sex role identity among college students: A cross-cultural analysis. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 15 , 476-489. Fisher, D. G., & Fick, C. (1993) . Measuring social desirability: Short forms of the MarloweCrowne Social Desirability Scale. Educationa l and Psychological Measurem ent, 53 , 417-424. Franklin, C. W. (1986) . Conceptual and logical issues in theory and rese arch relate d to black masculinity. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 10 , 161-166. Franklin, C. W. (1988) . Men and society. Chicago: Ne lson-Hall. Franklin, C. W. (1994a) . Aint I a Man? The e fficacy of black masculinities for me ns studies in the 1990 s. In R. G. Majors & J. U. Gordon (Eds.), The Am erican black male: His present status and his futu re. New York: Nelson-Hall. Franklin, C. W. (1994b) . Men s studies, the men s movement, and the study of black masculinities: Further de mystification of masculinities in America. In R. G. Majors & J. U. Gordon (Eds.), The American black male: His present status and his futu re. New York: Nelson-Hall. Frijda, N., & Jahoda, G. (1966) . On the scope and me thods of cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychology, 1, 109-127. Ganote, C. (1997, March) . What makes a man egalitarian? Exam inin g the predictors of men s gender role attitudes. Paper pre sente d at the meeting of the American Men s Studies Association, Nashville, TN. Good, G. E., Borst, T. S., & Wallace , D. L. (1994) . Masculinity research: A review and critique. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 3, 3-14. Gutmann, D. (1975) . Parenthood: A ke y to the comparative study of the life cycle . In N. Datan & L. H. Ginsburg (Eds.), Lifespan developm ental psychology: Norm ative life crises. New York: Academic Press. Harris, A. C. (1994). Ethnicity as a determinant of sex role identity: A replication study of item se lection for the Be m Sex Role Inventory. Sex Roles, 31 , 241-273. Harris, I., Torre s, J. B., & Allender, D. (1994) . The re sponses of African-Ame rican men to dominant norms of masculinity within the United States. Sex Roles, 31 , 703-719. Harris, S. M. (1992) . Black male socialization theory and concepts. The Western Journ al of Black Studies, 16, 74-81. Harris, S. M. (1995) . Psychosocial developme nt and black male masculinity: Implications for counseling economically disadvantaged African American male adolescents. Journal of Counseling and Developm ent, 73 , 279-287. He lgeson, V. S. (1994). Prototype s and dimensions of masculinity and femininity. Sex Roles, 31 , 653-682. Hunter, A. G., & Davis, J. E. (1992) . Constructing ge nder: An exploration of Afro-Ame rican me ns conceptualization of manhood. G ender and Society, 6, 464-479. Hunter, A. G., & Davis, J. E . (1994) . Hidde n voices of black me n: The me aning, structure, and comple xity of manhood. Journal of Black Studies, 25, 20-40. Hyde, J. S., Krajnik, M., & Skuldt-Niederberge r, K. (1991). Androgyny across the life span: A re plication and longitudinal follow-up. Developm ental Psychology, 27, 516-519. Jung, C. G. (1953) . The stages of life. In H. Read, M. Fordham, & G. Adler (Eds.), Collected works (Vol. 2) . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1931.) Kauth, A. R., Marn de Magallanes, L., & Leone de Quintana, M. E. (1993). E l machismo en el imaginario social [Machismo in the social image] . Revista Latinoam ericana de Psicologa, 25 , 275-284. Komarovsky, M. (1976). Cultural contradictions and sex roles: The masculine case . Journal of Sociology, 78, 873-884. Lazur, R. F., & Majors, R. (1995) . Men of color: Ethnocultural variations of male gende r role strain. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men . New York: Basic Books. Le vant, R. F. (1996) . The ne w psychology of me n. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 27, 259-265. Le vant, R. F., Hirsch, L., Cele ntano, E., Cozza, T., Hill, S., MacEachern, M., Marty, N., & Schnede ker, J. (1992) . The male role: An investigation of contemporary norms. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 14 , 325-337.

Mu lticultural Mascu linity Ideology Scale

741

Le vant, R. F., & Majors, R. G. (1997) . Masculinity ideology among African American and European Ame rican college wome n and men. Journal of G ender, Culture, and Health, 2, 33-43. Le vant, R. F., Rongxian, W., & Fische r, J. (1996) . Masculinity ideology: A comparison betwe en U.S. and Chinese young men and women. Journal of G ender, Culture, and Health, 1 , 207220. Majors, R., & Billson, J. M. (1992) . Coolpose: The dilem mas of black manhood in America . New York: Le xington. Majors, R., Tyler, R., Pe de n, B., & Hall, R. E . (1994) . Cool Pose : A symbolic me chanism for masculine role enactment and coping by black males. In R. G. Majors & J. U. Gordon (Eds.) The American black male: His present status and his future. Ne w York: Nelson-Hall. Mar n, G., & Mar n, B. V. (1991) . Research with Hispanic populations. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Se ries E ds.), Applied social research methods series: Vol. 23. Ne wbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. O Neil, J. M., He lms, B. J., Gable, R. K., David, L., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1986). Gende r Role Conflict Scale: College me ns fear of femininity. Sex Roles, 14, 335-350. Parker, S., & Kleiner, R. J. (1969) . Social and psychological dimensions of the family role performance of the negro male. Journal of Marriage and the Fam ily, 31, 500-506. Ple ck, J. H. (1981) . The m yth of m asculinity. Cambridge , MA: MIT Pre ss. Ple ck, J. H. (1995). The gende r role strain paradigm: An update. In R. F. Le vant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men . Ne w York: Basic Books. Ple ck, J. H., Sonenstein, F. L., & Ku, L. C. (1993) . Masculinity ideology: Its impact on adolesce nt males hete rosexual re lationships. Journal of Socal Issues, 49, 11-29. Ple ck, J. H., Sonenstein, F. L., & Ku, L. C. (1994) . Attitudes toward male roles among adolesce nt males: A discriminant validity analysis. Sex Roles, 30, 481-501. Roberts, G. W. (1994) . Brother to brother: African American modes of re lating among me n. Journal of Black Studies, 24, 379-390. Sattel, J. W. (1976) . The inexpre ssive male: Trage dy or sexual politics? Social Problem s, 23 , 469-477. Snyde r, M. (1974) . Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 526-537. Sonenste in, F. L., Ple ck, J. H., Ku, L. C. (1991) . Levels of sexual activity among adolescent males in the United State s. Fam ily Planning Perspectives, 23, 162-167. Staples, R. (1978) . Masculinity and race : The dual dilemma of black men. Journal of Social Issues, 34, 169-183. Stolen, K. A. (1991). Gende r, sexuality, and violence in E cuador. Ethnos, 56, 82-100. Strong, W. F., McQ uillen, J. S., & Hughey, J. D. (1994) . E n e l laberinto de machismo: A comparative analysis of macho attitudes among Hispanic and Anglo college students. The Howard Journal of Com munications, 5 , 18-35. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983). Using multivariate statistics. Ne w York: Harper & Row. Thompson, E. H. (1990) . Courtship violence and the male role. Men s Studies Review, 7, 4-13. Thompson, E . H., Jr., Grisani, C., & Ple ck, J. H. (1985) . Attitudes toward the male role and their correlates. Sex Roles, 13 , 413-427. Thompson, E. H., Jr., & Pleck, J. H. (1986) . The structure of male role norms. Am erican Behavioral Scientist, 29, 531-543. Thompson, E. H., Pleck, J. H., & Ferre ra, D. L. (1992). Men and masculinities: Scale s for masculinity ideology and masculinity-related constructs. Sex Roles, 27 , 573-607. Triandis, H. C. (1972) . The analysis of subjective culture. Ne w York: John Wiley. Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1982). Measurin g sex stereotypes: A m ultination study. Ne wbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Williams, J. E ., & Best, D. L. (1990) . Sex and psyche: G ender and self viewed cross-culturally. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Z elnik, M., & Shah, F. K. (1983) . First intercourse among young Americans. Fam ily Planning Perspectives, 15 , 64-70.