Methods and History of Gender Research 53■ There seemed to be some confusion among masculin-
ity, femininity, and sexual orientation. An assumption
at the time was that psychologically healthy men
were masculine and psychologically healthy women
were feminine.1954–1982: Sex Typing and Androgyny
This period was marked by Eleanor Macco-
by’s (1966) publication ofThe Development
of Sex Differences, which reviewed important
theories of sex typing, that is, how boys and
girls developed sex-appropriate preferences,
personality traits, and behaviors. Many
of these theories are reviewed in detail in
Chapter 5.
In addition, in 1973, Anne Constanti-
nople published a major critique of the exist-
ing M/F instruments. She questioned the use
of sex differences as the basis for defining
masculinity and femininity; she also questioned
whether M/F was really a unidimensional con-
struct that could be captured by a single bipolar
scale. The latter assumption, in particular, was
addressed during this period by the publication
of instruments that distinguished masculinity
and femininity as independent constructs.Instrumental Versus Expressive Distinc-
tion. A distinction brought to the study
of gender roles that helped conceptual-
ize masculinity and femininity as separate
dimensions was the distinction between an
instrumental and an expressive orientation.
In 1955, Parsons, a sociologist, and Bales, a
social psychologist, distinguished between
instrumental or goal-oriented behavior
and expressive or emotional behavior in
their studies of male group interactions.
The instrumental leader focuses on get-
ting the job done and the expressive leader
focuses on maintaining group harmony.score. They applied the same logic to a fe-
male who receives a masculine score. If the
instrument does not measure psychological
masculinity and femininity among both men
and women, we have to wonder about the
purpose of the test. Franck and Rosen sug-
gested their instrument measures acceptance
of one’s gender role rather than the degree
of masculinity and femininity. Males who
scored masculine and females who scored
feminine were considered to have accepted
their gender roles.TAKE HOME POINTS
■ During this period, the concept of M/F was introduced.
However, it was defined merely by sex differences.
■ Because women were rarely included in research, one
scale of femininity, from the MMPI, was validated on
homosexual men. Homosexuality was thought to be
equivalent to femininity.
■ Projective tests of M/F were developed to reduce de-
mand characteristics. However, these tests were flawed
in that sex differences in drawings were taken to be
evidence of masculinity and femininity.
■ All the M/F scales developed during this period suf-
fered from a number of conceptual weaknesses:—The tests did not distinguish between more or less
masculine people, nor did they distinguish between
more or less feminine people.
—They merely distinguished men from women, a dis-
tinction that did not need to be made.
—Any item that revealed sex differences was taken as
evidence of masculinity and femininity, regardless
of its relevance to these constructs (e.g., thinking
Tokyo is a city in India is an indicator of femininity).
—All the scales were bipolar, such that masculinity
represented one end and femininity represented the
other.
—Gay men were equated with feminine women.M02_HELG0185_04_SE_C02.indd 53 6/21/11 12:19 PM