1974•Journal of Consulting and Clinical PsychologyRequires access

The measurement of psychological androgyny.

Sandra L. Bem

Open publisher page 8,606 citations

Abstract

This article describes the development of a new sex-role inventory that treats masculinity and femininity as two independent dimensions, thereby making it possible to characterize a person as masculine, feminine, or "androgynous " as a function of the difference between his or her endorsement of masculine and feminine personality characteristics. Normative data are presented, as well as the results of various psychometric analyses. The major findings of conceptual interest are: (a) the dimensions of masculinity and femininity are empirically as well as logically independent; (6) the concept of psychological androgyny is a reliable one; and (c) highly sex-typed scores do not reflect a general tendency to respond in a socially desirable direction, but rather a specific tendency to describe oneself in accordance with sex-typed standards of desirable behavior for men and women. Both in psychology and in society at large, masculinity and femininity have long been conceptualized as bipolar ends of a single continuum; accordingly, a person has had to be either masculine or feminine, but not both. This sex-role dichotomy has served to obscure two very plausible hypotheses: first, that many individuals might be "androgynous"; that is, they might be both masculine and feminine, both assertive and yielding, both instrumental and expressive—depending on the situational appropriateness of these vari-ous behaviors; and conversely, that strongly sex-typed individuals might be seriously lim-ited in the range of behaviors available to them as they move from situation to situa-tion. According to both Kagan (1964) and Kohlberg (1966), the highly sex-typed indi-vidual is motivated to keep his behavior con-sistent with an internalized sex-role standard, a goal that he presumably accomplishes by suppressing any behavior that might be con-sidered undesirable or inappropriate for his sex. Thus, whereas a narrowly masculine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are stereotyped as feminine, and a narrowly femi-nine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are stereotyped as masculine, a mixed, or!This research was supported by IROIMH 21735

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article describes the development of a new sex-role inventory that treats masculinity and femininity as two independent dimensions, thereby making it possible to characterize a person as masculine, feminine, or "androgynous " as a function of the difference between his or her endorsement of masculine and feminine personality characteristics. Normative data are presented, as well as the results of various psychometric analyses. The major findings of conceptual interest are: (a) the dimensions of masculinity and femininity are empirically as well as logically independent; (6) the concept of psychological androgyny is a reliable one; and (c) highly sex-typed scores do not reflect a general tendency to respond in a socially desirable direction, but rather a specific tendency to describe oneself in accordance with sex-typed standards of desirable behavior for men and women. Both in psychology and in society at large, masculinity and femininity have long been conceptualized as bipolar ends of a single continuum; accordingly, a person has had to be either masculine or feminine, but not both. This sex-role dichotomy has served to obscure two very plausible hypotheses: first, that many individuals might be "androgynous"; that is, they might be both masculine and feminine, both assertive and yielding, both instrumental and expressive—depending on the situational appropriateness of these vari-ous behaviors; and conversely, that strongly sex-typed individuals might be seriously lim-ited in the range of behaviors available to them as they move from situation to situa-tion. According to both Kagan (1964) and Kohlberg (1966), the highly sex-typed indi-vidual is motivated to keep his behavior con-sistent with an internalized sex-role standard, a goal that he presumably accomplishes by suppressing any behavior that might be con-sidered undesirable or inappropriate for his sex. Thus, whereas a narrowly masculine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are stereotyped as feminine, and a narrowly femi-nine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are stereotyped as masculine, a mixed, or!This research was supported by IROIMH 21735

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 8606 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article describes the development of a new sex-role inventory that treats masculinity and femininity as two independent dimensions, thereby making it possible to characterize a person as masculine, feminine, or "androgynous " as a function of the difference between his or her endorsement of masculine and feminine personality characteristics. Normative data are presented, as well as the results of various psychometric analyses. The major findings of conceptual interest are: (a) the dimensions of masculinity and femininity are empirically as well as logically independent; (6) the concept of psychological androgyny is a reliable one; and (c) highly sex-typed scores do not reflect a general tendency to respond in a socially desirable direction, but rather a specific tendency to describe oneself in accordance with sex-typed standards of desirable behavior for men and women. Both in psychology and in society at large, masculinity and femininity have long been conceptualized as bipolar ends of a single continuum; accordingly, a person has had to be either masculine or feminine, but not both. This sex-role dichotomy has served to obscure two very plausible hypotheses: first, that many individuals might be "androgynous"; that is, they might be both masculine and feminine, both assertive and yielding, both instrumental and expressive—depending on the situational appropriateness of these vari-ous behaviors; and conversely, that strongly sex-typed individuals might be seriously lim-ited in the range of behaviors available to them as they move from situation to situa-tion. According to both Kagan (1964) and Kohlberg (1966), the highly sex-typed indi-vidual is motivated to keep his behavior con-sistent with an internalized sex-role standard, a goal that he presumably accomplishes by suppressing any behavior that might be con-sidered undesirable or inappropriate for his sex. Thus, whereas a narrowly masculine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are stereotyped as feminine, and a narrowly femi-nine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are stereotyped as masculine, a mixed, or!This research was supported by IROIMH 21735

Key concepts: Androgyny, Psychology, Psychological testing, California Psychological Inventory, Clinical psychology, Social psychology, Developmental psychology, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The measurement of psychological androgyny. — Research Paper | ScholarLens