Dimensions of Gender Stereotypes: Positive Personality, Cognitive, Physical, and Negative Personality

Abstract

This scale assesses the multifaceted nature of gender stereotypes, focusing specifically on their dynamic properties—the perception that attributes of social groups change over time. Rooted in Social Role Theory, the instrument operationalizes stereotypes across four distinct dimensions: positive personality, cognitive ability, physical attributes, and negative personality traits, for both masculine and feminine targets. The research underpinning this scale posits that perceived changes in social roles, particularly those of women, lead to an erosion of perceived sex differences and make the female stereotype particularly dynamic. The assessment uses a 7-point likelihood rating scale.

Keywords

Gender Stereotypes, Dynamic Constructs, Social Roles, Sex Differences, Masculinity, Femininity, Personality, Cognitive Attributes, Physical Traits, Psychometrics, Social Role Theory, EPAQ.

Authors

Amanda B. Diekman, Alice H. Eagly

Purpose

The primary purpose of this scale is to systematically assess the various dimensions of gender stereotypes. It is specifically designed to measure how individuals perceive the likelihood of a target individual (e.g., the average man or woman) possessing a range of traits across different domains (personality, cognition, and physical appearance).

The instrument facilitates the study of stereotype content and structure, allowing researchers to explore how these perceptions shift over time, supporting the concept of dynamic stereotypes. The scale is crucial for research investigating the consequences of changing social roles on perceived group characteristics.

Construct

The scale measures the content of gender stereotypes, conceptualized as dynamically changing attributes of social groups. The underlying theoretical framework is Social Role Theory, which suggests that stereotypes are fundamentally shaped by the typical social roles group members occupy.

When these social roles change (e.g., due to increasing similarity in the professional and domestic roles of men and women), the associated stereotypes are predicted to change accordingly. The construct is measured across four specific dimensions for both masculine and feminine targets: Positive Personality, Cognitive Traits, Physical Traits, and Negative Personality Traits. Negative femininity is further broken down into unmitigated communion and passive aggression subscales.

Validity

The original research by Diekman and Eagly (2000) focuses heavily on the theoretical consistency and predictive power of the scale regarding temporal changes in stereotypes. While explicit measures of criterion or predictive validity are not detailed in the summary, the items utilized were drawn from previously established and factor-analyzed instruments, providing strong content and structural validity.

Specifically, the item selection relied on prior factor analysis conducted by Cejka & Eagly (1999) and traits identified within the established Extended Personal Attributes Questionnaire (EPAQ) (Spence & Helmreich, 1978). This derivation ensures that the traits assessed are empirically relevant and align with existing, validated dimensions of gender-typed attributes.

Reliability

The reliability of the scale is demonstrated through high measures of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) across two separate experiments reported in the foundational study. All primary subscales exhibited robust reliability, generally exceeding the acceptable threshold of .80, indicating that the items within each dimension measure a consistent underlying construct.

The reported alphas for the first and second experiments, respectively, were:

• Masculine Personality: .85 and .81
• Masculine Cognitive: .92 and .89
• Masculine Physical: .88 and .81
• Feminine Personality: .93 and .92
• Feminine Cognitive: .84 and .84
• Feminine Physical: .88 and .86

Factor Analysis

The items comprising the various dimensions of the scale were not newly developed but were strategically selected based on prior empirical work. They were drawn from a factor analysis conducted by Cejka and Eagly (1999) and from established traits within the Extended Personal Attributes Questionnaire (EPAQ) (Spence & Helmreich, 1978).

This methodology ensures that the traits selected are factorially distinct and map onto the defined dimensions of positive personality, cognitive ability, and physical characteristics for both sexes. The scale offers flexible scoring options, allowing for 4-item, 6-item, and 8-item versions of the subscales depending on the specific traits included in the research design.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-Report/Stereotype Assessment Scale

Format: Participants rate the likelihood that a target individual (e.g., the average man) possesses each trait on a 7-point scale, ranging from very unlikely to very likely.

Language Available: English (Original study context)

Population Group: General population (used primarily with university students in initial studies)

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults

Population Details: Used to assess perceptions of gender stereotypes held by the general public.

Test Methodology: Quantitative assessment of trait likelihood applied to social group prototypes. Typical assessment involves presenting a target individual (e.g., the average man or woman of the past, present, or future) and asking participants to assign a likelihood rating to each trait.

Keywords

Gender Stereotype Scale, Diekman and Eagly, Dynamic Stereotypes, Internal Consistency, Psychometric Tool, Social Cognition, Negative Femininity, Unmitigated Communion.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in source material.

Correspondence Address: Refer to the primary publication for correspondence details.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 2000 (Based on seminal publication)

Permissions: Usage permissions are typically governed by the authors and the original journal publication (Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin). Researchers should cite the original article: Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future.

Fee: Not applicable for academic research use of the scale items, but access to the full article may require journal subscription.

Reference’s

• Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171-1188.
• Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender stereotypes: A meta-analysis of their content using the traits and roles method. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 991-1003.
• Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. University of Texas Press.
• Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Holahan, C. K. (1979). Negative and positive components of psychological masculinity and femininity and their relationships to self-reports of adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1673-1682.
• Diekman, A. B., Goodfriend, W., & Goodwin, S. A. (2004). The dynamic nature of gender stereotypes: The role of role change in stereotype maintenance. Sex Roles, 51, 353-364.

Items of the Dimensions of Gender Stereotypes: Positive Personality, Cognitive, Physical, and Negative Personality

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Note. Items were presented in Diekman & Eagly (2000); drawn from factor-analysis by Cejka & Eagly (1999) and the EPAQ (Spence & Helmreich, 1978). Alphas for all versions of the scales can be found in Diekman & Eagly (2000). Typical assessment of stereotypes is to present a target individual (e.g., the average man) and ask participants to rate the likelihood that this target individuals possesses each trait on a 7-point scale, ranging from very unlikely to very likely.

Unmarked personality, cognitive, and physical items formed the 4-item scales.

^a These items were added to form 6-item scales.

^b These items were added to form 8-item scales.

^c These items comprise the unmitigated communion subscale of negative femininity (Spence, Helmreich, & Holahan, 1979; see Diekman, Goodfriend, & Goodwin, 2004, for alphas).

^d These items comprise the passive aggression subscale of negative femininity (Spence, Helmreich, & Holahan, 1979; see Diekman, Goodfriend, & Goodwin, 2004, for alphas).