VTechWorks staff will be away for the winter holidays starting Tuesday, December 24, 2024, through Wednesday, January 1, 2025, and will not be replying to requests during this time. Thank you for your patience, and happy holidays!

Browsing by Author "Aadahl, Sarah"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    The Precarious Man: Measuring masculine discrepancy and its relationships with aggression and misogyny
    Aadahl, Sarah (Virginia Tech, 2024-12-17)
    In the studies of men and masculinity, most of the focus has been on masculine dysfunction strain, or the strain males feel as it relates to the various expectations of masculinity. In contrast, the research on discrepancy strain (or the strain males feel when they fail to meet these expectations) is limited. Unlike dysfunction strain, there are not any widely accepted and utilized scales measuring discrepancy. By combining identity theory and general strain theory with gender and feminist theory, my goal is to examine how masculine discrepancy may be related to the endorsement of aggression and misogyny. The aim of this dissertation is to develop and validate a scale to operationalize masculine discrepancy as it is theorized; this scale will then be used to examine the following research questions: does masculine discrepancy impact males' individual endorsement of aggression and misogyny? And if so, are these impacts moderated by failure to meet particular aspects, or "pillars," of masculinity? I created a masculine discrepancy scale that more accurately operationalizes the theoretical concept of masculine discrepancy. First, I synthesized various masculinity scales, namely the Male Role Norms Inventory, the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory, and the Man Box scale to develop assessments of males' masculine ideals ("ideal") and perceptions of their lived experiences ("actual" or "experiences"). By comparing ideal to actual, we can calculate a discrepancy score, where a score of 0 indicates consistency, and scores further from 0 indicate discrepancy. These scores are calculated both as an overall assessment of discrepancy and by particular pillars of masculinity. Following a pilot study of undergraduate sociology students, 1,000 males above the age of 18 were surveyed. These surveys were conducted via Cint panel distribution in December 2023. I then use factor and cluster analysis as well as regression analyses to test the following hypotheses: (1) Masculine Discrepancy Stress will have a positive relationship with aggression and misogyny. (2) Higher endorsement of masculine ideals and lived experiences will be associated with higher levels of endorsement of aggression and misogyny when compared to lower endorsement of ideals and experiences. (3) Masculine Discrepancy, or the difference between idealized and lived masculine experiences, will be negatively correlated with aggression and misogyny. Individuals with positive discrepancies (lived experiences surpassing their masculine ideals) will exhibit lower levels of aggression and misogyny compared to those with negative discrepancies (masculine ideals surpassing lived experiences). (4) Certain masculine ideals and experiences will have stronger associations with aggression and misogyny than others. (5) Cluster analysis of ideals and experiences will reveal four groups of males: Norm-Favoring Consistents: High ideals, high experiences; Norm-Favoring Discrepants: High ideals, low experiences; Norm-Rejecting Consistents: Low ideals, low experiences; Norm-Rejecting Discrepants: Low ideals, high experiences. (6) These clusters will differ in their endorsement of aggression and misogyny. The Norm-Favoring Discrepants will exhibit the highest levels of aggression and misogyny, followed by the Norm-Favoring Consistents. The Norm-Rejecting Consistents will have lower levels than both of the Norm-Favoring groups, and the Norm-Rejecting Discrepants will have the lowest endorsement of aggression and misogyny. Hypotheses 1 through 4 were supported, while hypotheses 5 and 6 had limited support, as the two "Consistent" groups did not clearly differ as "norm-favoring" vs. "norm-rejecting."