Abstract
This study provides preliminary psychometric data on a newly designed self-report measure assessing heterosexual male identity dimensions; it is labelled Male Identity Scale (MIS) and is an adaptation from the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale (Mohr & Kedra, 2011) that takes into account the theoretical models by Marcia (1987) and Worthington et al. (2002) concerning heterosexual identity development. Two studies were conducted to evaluate the validity and reliability of the MIS. In Study 1 (n = 563 straight men) an Exploratory Factor Analysis and a Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported a 5-factor solution reflecting heterosexual male identity dimensions such as Acceptance Concerns, Identity Uncertainty, Identity Superiority, Identity Centrality and Heteronormativity. Predicted associations with measures of masculinity-related constructs and psychosocial functioning provided preliminary validity evidence for MIS scores in an undergraduate university male student population. Study 2 (n = 116 straight men) provided evidence of the test–retest and internal consistency reliability of MIS scores. These studies suggest that the MIS may offer researchers an efficient means of assessing the multiple dimensions of heterosexual male identity.
Publisher
National Documentation Centre (EKT)
Reference88 articles.
1. Awang, Z. (2015). SEM made simple: A gentle approach to learning Structural Equation Modeling. MPWS Rich Publication.
2. Baltar, F., & Brunet, I. (2012). Social research 2.0: virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook. Internet research, 22(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241211199960
3. Barrada, J. R., Castro, Á., Correa, A. B., & Ruiz-Gómez, P. (2018). The tridimensional structure of sociosexuality: Spanish validation of the Revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory. Journal of sex & marital therapy, 44(2), 149-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623x.2017.1335665
4. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 42(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036215
5. Brammer, R. (2012). Diversity in ounselling. Cengage Learning.