Bem Sex Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique.

Abstract

The rationale underlying the construction of the Bern Sex Role Inventory (BSRI), and the psychometric properties of the resulting instrument are scrutinized. Following a brief discussion of different types of sex role research, the results of two studies are presented and discussed. In Study 1, 1,464 graduate students rated the desirability of the BSRI traits for one of three referents: man, woman, or adult in American society. In Study 2, 571 graduate students used the BSRI for self-ratings. It was found that, regardless of the referents used, the "masculine" traits were relatively high in desirability but some of the "feminine" traits were low in desirability. Discriminant function analyses revealed that discrimination among groups was primarily due to the differential ratings of the two traits Masculine and Feminine for the different referents. Results from factor analyses of the ratings of desirability and the self-ratings indicated that (a) Bern's classification of the BSRI traits into masculine, feminine, and neutral is not tenable; (b) the dimensions that underlie desirability ratings differ from those that underlie self-ratings; and (c) the dimensions of self-ratings of males differ from those of females. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of the findings for the measurement of androgyny.Although sex roles have been a subject of study for some time, interest in them has greatly intensified as a direct result of the activities and writings dealing with, or emanating from, the women's liberation movement. (For a review of sex role research, see Hochschild, 1973, and, more recently, Ruble, Frieze, & Parsons, 1976 Investigations of masculinity, femininity, and androgyny have proliferated, emphasizing such aspects as his-

Toward an LGBT-informed paradigm for children who break gender norms: Comment on Drummond et al. (2008) and Rieger et al. (2008).

“…Self-reported adult MF and observer-rated childhood MF were correlated for men only. To support the argument that these moderate relationships between self-report and observer ratings evidence an MF personality dimension, Rieger et al (2008) cited Pedhazur and Tetenbaum (1979). However, those authors also found only a weak relationship between self-reported masculinity, femininity, and other gender-related traits.…”

Androgyny and sex role measurement: A personal construct approach.

“…In fact there is one study (Bern, 1974) where no desirability differences appear to have been present, one study in which desirability differences were present (Pedhazur & Tetenbaum, 1979), and one study which did not directly address the question (Silvern & Ryan, 1979).…”

“…As noted earlier, the BSRI and PAQ have been criticized on a number of other counts, including: (a) a lack of theoretical underpinnings, (b) a failure to tap the most salient dimensions of sex differentiation in personality and behavior, and (c) a failure to provide a comparative context for selfdescription (Pedhazur & Tetenbaum, 1979;Locksley & Col ten, 19 79). What is needed is a sex-role inventory which would not assign traits of preselected desirability to the M and F scales a priori, which would be securely tied to theory, which would tap the most salient dimensions of sex differentiation for each individual, and which would provide a comparative context for the gender constructs used.…”

“…First, there is the suggestion by Pedhazur and Tetenbaum (1979) that BSRI masculine traits are more desirable than BSRI feminine traits. Although this would explain the strong relationship between M and adjustment, as well as the inconsistent relationship between F and adjustment, more research is needed to substantiate that these desirability differences actually do exist.…”

“…Statistical Criticisms of the BSRI and PAQ Pedhazur and Tetenbaum (1979) had graduate students rate the desirability of BSRI traits for one of three reference groups: American man, American woman, or American adult.…”