Assessing Women's Feminist Identity Development: Studies of Convergent, Discriminant, and Structural Validity

Abstract

Researchers have called for increasing sophistication in the assessment of women's feminist identity development (Enns & Hackett, 1990; Hackett, Enns, & Zetzer, 1992) to understand important psychological processes. This series of studies examined recent efforts to operationalize Downing and Roush's (1985) model of feminist identity development. Specifically, the psychometric properties of two existing measures—the Feminist Identity Development Scale (Bargad & Hyde, 1991) and the Feminist Identity Scale (Rickard, 1987)—were examined in two studies with separate samples of women (total N= 486). Results of Study 1 indicated the strengths and significant limitations associated with each scale (e.g., low internal consistency for some subscales, item‐subscale inconsistency). A composite measure (derived from these scales) with better overall psychometric properties is described. In Study 2, we found good support for the composite instrument's internal consistency, as well as convergent, discriminant, and factorial validity in a sample that included a wide age range and nonstudent community residents.

Development of the Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory

“…Fischer et al (2000) reported a 5-factor structure that resembled Downing and Roush's (1985) model and was reported to predict ego identity status, perceptions of sexist events, and involvement in women's organizations. Fischer et al (2000) reported internal consistency estimates that range from .68 to .84 for their first sample and .71 to .86 for their second sample. reported internal consistency estimates that range between .73 to .84 in their study.…”

“…The Feminist Identity Composite (FIC; Fischer et al, 2000) was developed to assess feminist identity development as a composite of 33 items from two previous measures of feminist identity [i.e., 20 items from the Feminist Identity Scale (Rickard, 1989) and 13 items from the Feminist Identity Development Scale (Bargad & Hyde, 1991)]. Fischer et al (2000) reported a 5-factor structure that resembled Downing and Roush's (1985) model and was reported to predict ego identity status, perceptions of sexist events, and involvement in women's organizations.…”

“…The fourth stage, synthesis, is when women develop a positive feminist identity and are able to transcend traditional gender roles. The final stage, active commitment, reflects beliefs that men are equal to women but not the same, and reflects a strong commitment to positive social change that addresses societal inequities (see Bargad & Hyde, 1991;Downing & Roush, 1985;Fischer et al, 2000;Moradi, Subich, & Phillips, 2002). As such, we posit that CFNI scores, which were designed to measure conformity to traditional gender role norms in the dominant culture of U.S. society, should be positively related to the passive acceptance stage scores that reflect acceptance of traditional European American, North American, gender roles, but negatively to the other four feminist identity stages as these reflect ever increasing levels of feminist identity.…”

A Feminist Virtual Agent for Breastfeeding Promotion

“…In addition to sociodemographics, we measured feminist self-identification [22] and feminist values [23] at intake, using validated 7-point Likert scale instruments. Following interaction with the agent, we assessed overall satisfaction, desire to continue, comfort discussing breastfeeding with the agent, and preference to discuss breastfeeding with a doctor or nurse (rather than the agent), in addition to assessing the degree to which the agent was feminist (as a manipulation check), Table 1.…”

Not All Nonlabelers Are Created Equal

“…Although the findings were consistent across two samples, future research should replicate our work using different measures to capture relevant constructs. For instance, specific measures of feminist beliefs, such as those developed by Henley and her colleagues (Henley, Spalding, & Kosta, 2000) or Fischer et al (2000), would enable researchers to directly assess nonlabelers' feminist perspectives. Further, our measure of ''core beliefs'' of feminism was limited to three items and focused on liberal feminist beliefs about gender equality.…”