Feminist Identity and Attitudes toward Assertive Behavior: Explaining the Relationship
Karolyn J. Budzek
University of Dayton
May, 2003
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 2
Table of Contents
Introduction..............................................................................................................3
Assertiveness............................................................................................................8
Method ...................................................................................................................15
Participants.....................................................................................................15
Measures ........................................................................................................15
Procedure .......................................................................................................17
Results....................................................................................................................18
Discussion ..............................................................................................................21
References..............................................................................................................24
Feminist Identity and Attitudes toward Assertive Behavior: Explaining the Relationship
masculinity (Bem, 1974; Berzins, Welling, & Wetter, 1978; Spence, Helmreich, & Stapp,
assertiveness and masculinity (Adams & Sherer, 1985; Lohr & Nix, 1982; Nix, Lohr, &
Stauffacher, 1980; Rodriguez, Nietzel, & Berzins, 1980). For instance, Nix et al. found
Masculinity has been touted as the ideal gender role orientation for positive
mental health and adjustment (Long, 1986; Spence, 1984; Taylor & Hall, 1982; Whitley,
value of masculine traits in American society (Bassoff & Glass, 1982; Bernard, 1980;
Kelly & Worell, 1978; Whitley, 1984). This is in contrast to the findings of similar
studies rating androgyny (high masculinity, high femininity) as the ideal (Bem, 1974;
Jones, Chernovetz, & Hansson, 1978; Kaplan, 1980; Spence et al., 1975). The results of
numerous studies involving self-report measures of social skills and behaviors have
Sherer, 1985; Campbell, Steffen, & Langmeyer, 1981; Nix, Lohr, & Mosesso, 1983; Nix
and general passivity (Antill & Cunningham, 1979; Aube, Norcliffe, Craig, & Koestner,
1995; Bassoff & Glass, 1982; Markstrom-Adams, 1989). The lack of masculinity has
been implicated in mental illness and distress more so than the presence of femininity
(Bromberger & Matthews, 1996; Robins, 1986; Whitley, 1983, 1985; Whitley & Gridley,
satisfaction, low alcohol consumption, pleasure capacity, and agreeableness (Aube et al.,
1995; Frisch & McCord, 1987; Lubinski, Tellgen, & Butcher, 1983; Zeldow, Daugherty,
generally perceived as more androgynous than traditional females (Fowler, Fowler, &
Van de Riet, 1973; Jordan-Viola, Fassberg, & Viola, 1976; Leventhal & Matturo, 1981).
Feminists show a high level of collective self-esteem (i.e. self-esteem derived from
(Smith, 1999; Stoppard & Paisley, 1987). Another element predicting assertive behavior
thoughts about being assertive are associated with femininity (Arrindell et al., 1997;
Frisch & McCord, 1987; Woolfolk & Dever, 1979). This is often seen as the social
norm: assertive males and passive females. Women are not traditionally expected to
exhibit assertive behavior. Because others may see assertive behavior as unfeminine,
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 5
highly feminine women may be reluctant to engage in such behaviors. Women are also
less positively evaluated than men for similarly assertive behavior (Cowan & Koziej,
The current study explores the relationship between assertive behaviors, attitudes
toward assertiveness, sex-role orientation, and feminist identity through a series of self-
femininity and assertive behavior. Additionally, I hypothesize that when attitudes toward
assertiveness and feminist identity are statistically controlled, the relationship between
trait and psychosocial adjustment help therapists develop or discourage these aspects of a
client's personality. The relationship of gender role identity and mental health,
The link between depression and gender role identity has been studied in great
detail. Initially, a correlation between gender and depression was assumed. Although
twice as many female patients are diagnosed with clinical depression than males (Blehar
& Oren, 1995), many argue this is due to learned helplessness, degree of comfort seeking
help, victimization, or lower social status (Radloff & Rae, 1979, 1981; Nolen-Hoeksema,
2001; Depue & Monroe, 1978). Research by Landrine (1988) indicated that when
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 6
labeled as women, and severe depressive disorders were described as married women.
Later studies found gender role identity is a better predictor than gender of
& Paisley, 1987). Implicated in depression also is the lack of masculinity, with
androgynous subjects showing less instances of depression (Lengua & Stormshak, 2000;
Sanfilipo, 1994). This presents femininity not in a more positive light, but merely as
irrelevant. Factors other than gender role account for significant portions of the variance,
including life stress, support systems, and self-esteem (Feather, 1985; Dua, 1993;
Lubinski, Tellgen, & Butcher, 1981, 1983; Stoppard & Paisley, 1987). In a study by
perhaps that societal values play a large role by reinforcing instrumental, masculine
characteristics. Similarly, Radloff and Rae (1979) found that women were more
depressed than men at similar levels of life stress. They further interpreted these
role socialization. Whitley and Gridley (1993) find that self-esteem and masculinity are
may be developed that could make masculinity and femininity unimportant in assessing
behaviors such as hostility and avoidance (e.g. Markstrom-Adams, 1989; Marsh &
Byrne, 1991; Nezu & Nezu, 1987). Studies involving the NEO-PI-R report that
masculinity is strongly negatively correlated with neuroticism (e.g. Jones, Chernovetz, &
Hansson, 1978; Kimlicka, Sheppard, Sheppard, & Wakefield, 1988; Lippa & Connelly,
1990; Whitley & Gridley, 1993; Zeldow, Clark, & Daugherty, 1985).
behavioral value in American society (Bassoff & Glass, 1982; Bernard, 1980; Kelly &
for these behaviors. A person low in masculinity may be socially devalued, and one
characteristics that contributes to depressive symptoms, then, but instead decreased self-
worth and lack of social reinforcement. Numerous studies have uncovered a negative
relation between masculinity and social maladjustment, although femininity, for the most
part, has shown to be unrelated (Aube et al., 1995; Markstom-Adams, 1989; Taylor &
additive form (e.g. Bem, 1974; Campbell, Steffen, & Langmeyer, 1981; Cook, 1985; Hall
& Taylor, 1985), suggesting that femininity has a role in positive mental health. Indeed,
experience, and low psychoticism (Francis & Wilcox, 1997; Lippa & Connelly, 1990;
Marusic & Bratko, 1998; Ramanaiah & Detwiler, 1992). Feminine persons have higher
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 8
levels of dyadic adjustment, and are less likely than persons high in masculinity to
overestimate the quality of their interpersonal relationships and behavior (Aube et al.,
1995). Androgynous persons are considered to be the best of both gender roles: better
adjusted, more adaptive, and psychologically healthier (Bem, 1974). The additive model
of androgyny holds that masculinity and femininity are separate constructs, and scoring
person, therefore, is more adaptive and can better tailor their personality and reactions to
each situation, since they have access to a broader and more dynamic range of coping
A large portion of researchers, however, do not share this belief in the merits of
androgyny. Whitley and Gridley (1993) failed to find significant relationships between
femininity and the Five-Factor model of personality. Taylor and Hall (1982) suggest that
regarding psychological distress. Based on a review of the literature, it seems the current
prevailing view appears to be that of the masculinity model, denying that femininity is a
Assertiveness
Assertiveness and assertive behaviors have been studied and correlated with a
geographic variables (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Diener, Sandvik, Pavot & Fujita, 1992; Lu
& Shih, 1997). In a study by Herringer (1998) relating facets of extraversion to life
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 9
satisfaction, the only significant predictor of life satisfaction for males was assertiveness.
In a study by Kern and Paquette (1992), female undergraduates with assigned roommates
evaluated their roommate on several interpersonal qualities and behaviors. Higher levels
greater social competency and likeability. Additionally, Eskin (2003) reports that
adolescents who score high in self-report measures of assertiveness also report having
more anxiety and personal sacrifice during a conflict resolution situation than high-
assertive participant (Delamater & McNamara, 1985, 1991). People scoring low in
their opinions, and their preferences, even when cognitive ability was controlled,
suggesting a possible lack of clarity regarding their own attitudes, opinions, preferences,
goals, and priorities (Collins, Powell, & Oliver, 2000). Students with higher levels of
assertiveness and academic self-efficacy report fewer adjustment problems, and high
assertiveness scores were also associated with less loneliness (Poyrazli, 2001). In
addition, assertive people of both genders are more likely to be hired than nonassertive or
Nix, Lohr, & Stauffacher (1980) examined the relationship between sex, sex-role
role orientation was the only single predictor of the assertiveness measure, accounting for
52% of the variance. Nix, Lohr, & Mosesso (1984) replicated this finding – a strong
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 10
The trait of assertiveness was significantly correlated with the ‘average male,’ or
demonstrating the connection between assertiveness and masculinity (Haimo & Blitman,
sex-role orientation, Radin (2000) also found a positive correlation between ratings of
(1998) investigated the relationship between self-efficacy and sex-role orientation with
Assertive Efficacy, were the best predictors of masculinity. In a study by Wallace (1997)
not intuitive that therefore one must possess all aspects of masculinity to be assertive.
Twelve of the twenty feminine items on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974),
independent, strong personality, forceful, self-sufficient, willing to take a stand, and even
“assertive.” Assertive behavior is thus a sex-role violation for the feminine person,
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 11
especially a feminine woman who is less positively evaluated for assertion than her
feminine male counterpart. For instance, a study by Cowan and Koziej (1979) involved
wife was described as much more masculine and less feminine than identical behavior
performed by the husband. The wife’s submissive behavior, however, was not described
as more feminine and less masculine than the husband’s submissive behavior. Further,
the dominant man’s behavior was attributed mostly to situational factors, although the
personality.
assertiveness, instead of negatively correlated as once might expect (i. e. Avsec, 2002;
Nix et al., 1984; Sazan, 1995). The additive androgyny model of sex-role orientation
may explain this finding: femininity is not the opposite of masculinity, but another
whereas female participants rated assertive models as masculine. Gervasio & Crawford
behavior for women may be largely linguistic, such as verbal attack, inattention, pointed
attitudes regarding assertive behavior can play a role in one’s decision to behave in an
shape men and women’s assertiveness (Ridgeway, 2001). These beliefs can also create
roles -- for violating their expected sex-role orientation. In a study by Frisch and McCord
more skillful and had fewer negative thoughts associated being assertive than feminine
participants. Similar results were found with different populations, specifically reporting
negatively correlated with femininity in females (Lubinski, Tellgen, & Butcher, 1981,
1983; Arrindell et. al., 1997). In a study explaining the need for assertiveness trraining in
increasing female participation in small mized-sex task discussion, Lewittes and Bem
(1985) report than a lack of assertiveness when in the presence of men, rather than any
discussions. This finding could be explained in the same way, that feminine women may
feel that assertive behavior makes them appear unfeminine, especially in a mixed-sex
context.
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 13
Feminist Identity
High levels of feminist identity may also explain the relationship between
individual’s self-concept derived from being male or female (Burn, 1996). Other
evidence that many women – especially women high in femininity – are more likely to
derive self-esteem from social acceptance sources and interdependence relationships than
men or women low in femininity (Carpenter & Johnson, 2001; Cross & Madson, 1997;
Josephs, Markus, & Tafarodi, 1992). In a study by Carpenter and Johnson (2001),
women’s gender collective self-esteem was strongly related to the value they placed on
their gender. Self-esteem was greatest when feminist identity was high and the positive
women and low gender self-identity in men are positively related to support for feminist
Lesbian women often have higher masculinity scores than heterosexual women.
It had previously been theorized that this was a result of lesbian women naturally being
reduced to non-significance (Finlay & Scheltema, 1999). These results suggest that
feminist ideals are related to a more masculine sex-role, although more in-depth analyses
have not yet been produced. Feminist identification is predicted by not having
feminists were also more likely to believe in collective action and a merit-based society,
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 14
as well as less likely to believe that feminists are lesbians (Liss, O’Connor, Morosky, &
Crawford, 2001).
while talking to a confederate ate significantly less when paired with a male (Mori,
Chaiken, & Pliner, 1987). Possibly, women who have feminist beliefs will not present
these beliefs at the risk of violating their feminine gender-role. Alexander and Ryan
(1997), for example, noted that several undergraduate women in their study expressed an
The present research reexamined the relationship between sex-role orientation and
identity as well as positive beliefs about assertiveness may mediate the relationship
between masculinity and assertiveness. That is, high levels of feminism have been
correlated with assertiveness, and feminine women often think negatively about acting
women) are more likely to be feminist. Part of the strong relationship between
feminist identity to predict assertive behavior. In this way, women low in masculinity
can also be assertive and thus obtain psychosocial benefits related to assertive behavior.
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 15
masculinity and assertive behavior, and (2) no relationship would be found between
femininity and assertive behavior. Further, we hypothesize that (3) when thoughts about
assertiveness and feminist identity were statistically controlled, the relationship between
Method
Participants
courses at a Midwestern, private university participated in the study. Ages ranged from
for partial course credit. Additionally, a roommate or female friend completed one part
Measures
Sex-role orientation. The 60-item Bem Sex Role Inventory (Bem, 1974) is a
widely used measure that demonstrates good psychometric properties. Twenty of the
items are scored as the subscale "Masculinity," including “self-reliant” ”forceful,” and
”competitive”. Twenty of the items are scored as the subscale "Femininity," including
”affectionate,” ”loyal,” and ”cheerful.” The remaining 20 items are gender-neutral and
are not scored. Answers are scored on a 7-point likert scale from "Very uncharacteristic
Assertive behavior. The Assertion Inventory (Gambrill & Richey, 1975) consists
Examples of these situations include "Turn off a talkative friend," "Resist pressure to use
drugs," and "Apologize when you are at fault." Participants are asked to rate their degree
of discomfort or anxiety with the situation on a 5-point Likert scale from "None" to
"Very much." Participants then indicate, in the same forty situations, their probability or
reported on a 5-point Likert scale from "Always do it" to "Never do it." Finally, the
respondent circles the items that s/he would prefer to handle more assertively. This
and Identification of Situations. Both the participant and their study partner completed
this questionnaire.
feminist identity development proposed by Downing and Roush (1985). Items selected
from both the Feminist Identity Scale (FIS) (Rickard, 1987) and the Feminist Identity
Development Scale (FIDS) (Bargad & Hyde, 1991) by Fischer, Tokar, Mergl, Good,
Hill, and Blum (2000) were used to measure five stages of feminist development. Each
item is scored on a 5-point Likert scale from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree.”
The first subscale is Passive Acceptance, the belief that traditional gender roles
are advantageous (e.g., "I think that men and women had it better in the 1950s when
married women were housewives and their husbands supported them."). The second
"Men receive many advantages in this society and because of this are against equality for
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 17
feelings of connectedness with other women (e.g., "If I were to paint a picture or write a
poem, it would probably be about women or women's issues."). The fourth subscale,
Synthesis, is based on a positive feminist identity and transcendence of gender roles (e.g.,
"I have incorporated what is female and feminine into my own unique personality.").
The final stage of Active Commitment involves broader social change (e.g., "I am very
committed to a cause that I believe contributes to a more fair and just world for all
people.").
Thoughts about Assertiveness items and 11 items measuring Positive Thoughts about
Assertiveness. Respondents decide how frequently they may have been thinking a
similar thought during an assertive situation. Each item is scored on a 5-point Likert
scale from "Hardly Ever" to "Very Often". Examples of items include "I was thinking
that I was too nervous to say what I felt," and "I was thinking that I could benefit by
expressing myself."
Procedure
Participants who signed up for the study were sent via e-mail a packet of eight
the Assertion Inventory, the Assertion Self-Statement Test (Revised), the Bem Sex Role
Inventory, and selected items from the Feminist Identity Scale and the Feminist Identity
Development Scale. The participants' study partner filled out a demographics sheet and
the Assertion Inventory as it pertained to the participant, not themselves. When the
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 18
participants returned a completed packet, they were sent via e-mail a debriefing and
Results
Descriptive statistics for all ten study variables are reported in Table 1. An alpha
Hypotheses 1 and 2
significant interactions were found, and the correlation coefficients appear in Table 2.
Consistent with our first two hypotheses, masculinity was positively associated
with participants’ reports of assertive behavior (r = .40, p < .05), and no relationship
between femininity and participants’ reports of assertive behavior was observed, (r = .16,
p > .05). Contrary to our hypotheses, no significant relationship was found between
Hypothesis 3
Table 1
Table 2
Sex-Role Assertiveness
Masculine Sex-Role --
Feminine Sex-Role .119 --
Self-report Assertiveness .40** .16 --
Partner-report Assertiveness .07 -.10 .09 --
Feminist Identity: -.10 -.17 -.14 -.01
Passive Acceptance
Feminist Identity: .20 .28* .32** -.12
Revelation
Feminist Identity: .13 .24* .14 -.16
Embeddedness
Feminist Identity: -.12 -.03 -.00 -.13
Synthesis
Feminist Identity: -.02 .15 .07 -.10
Active Commitment
Negative Thoughts .02 .16 .01 .03
about Assertiveness
associated with self-reported assertiveness, r = .32, p < .05. This subscale of feminist
unexpected finding, r = .28, p < .05. In order to directly test our mediation hypothesis,
feminist revelation in the first step, and masculinity in the second step. The results of this
masculinity and assertiveness was not significantly reduced when the effects of feminist
after the effects of masculinity were statistically controlled, R ² = .06, p < .05 (Table 4).
This suggests that feminist revelation adds a significant increment in the prediction of
Table 3
Step 1
Feminist Revelation .24 2.3 .02 .10 .01
Step 2
Masculine Sex-Role .35 3.4 .00 .12 .00
Table 4
Step 1
Masculine Sex-Role .35 3.36 .00 .16 .00
Step 2
Feminist Revelation .24 2.42 .02 .06 .02
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 23
Discussion
sex-role and assertive behavior (e.g. Nix, Lohr, & Stauffacher, 1980; Radin, 2000). As in
previous research, feminine sex-role was unrelated to assertive behavior (Avsec, 2002;
Nix, Lohr, & Mosesso, 1984; Sazan, 1995). However, the hypothesized mechanisms for
these findings, feminist identity and beliefs about assertive behavior, were not supported.
The measure of negative assertive beliefs was not associated with femininity,
masculinity, or assertive behavior. This finding contrasts with that of Arrindell et al.
(1997), who report a positive correlation between distress in assertiveness and femininity
in women. Also contrary to this finding is the results of a study by Frisch and McCord
(1987) that found a correlation between negative thoughts about an assertive task and a
behaviors, suggesting that the thoughts or cognitions regarding behavior are unrelated to
behavior itself. One possibility is that the cognitive component of assertiveness may not
assertiveness and behavioral assertiveness has been documented in some of the research
(e. g. Frisch & McCord, 1987), but often this difference is nonsignificant (Nix et al.,
relationship between feminism and assertiveness (Carpenter & Johnson, 2001). Finlay
and Scheltema (1999) report that the difference in masculinity scores among lesbian and
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 24
heterosexual women are reduced to non-significance when feminist identity scores were
controlled. This suggests some type of relationship between feminism and sex-role
orientation. In the current research, only one type of feminism was correlated with self-
second stage of feminist identity, and is characterized by anger towards men and a
realization of gender discrimination (Downing & Roush, 1985). The revelation stage
begins as a questioning of one’s self and role in society. The revelation-stage feminist
often has feelings of guilt that she has perpetuated gender stereotypes in the past. Her
anger and growing trust in her perceptions of the world often lead to polarized thinking;
women are positive, men are negative. However, the revelation feminist rejects
womanhood.
Feminist revelation was also positively correlated with femininity. This suggests
that while highly feminine women may be assertive around men due to their feminist
identity, they (and their study partner) did not consider themselves assertive by nature.
Many of the adjectives on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974) defining femininity
relate to a lack of assertion. While feminist revelation was correlated with self-reported
partner-reports of participants’ assertive behavior were not. This may be because the
partners rating the participants were female as well. Since men’s opinions of women’s
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 25
assertive behavior are often more negative than same-sex opinions (Baucom & Danker-
Brown, 1983; Leventhal & Matturo, 1981), only same-sex partners were used in the
current study. Possibly, feminist women in the revelation stage may be most likely to be
Even though research has shown that women are more likely to conform to gender-typed
behavior when among men (Alexander & Ryan, 1997; Mori, Chaiken, & Pliner, 1987),
perhaps revelation-stage feminists, who reject stereotyped concepts of gender roles, will
act more assertively. To examine this possibility, future research might compare
assertive behaviors in same-sex and mixed-sex groups, in addition to self- and partner-
Several areas for future research emerge from this study, including observational
examined as a function of the sex of the person being confronted. Future research might
examine the precise conditions under which a significant amount of women will appear
gender-typed as feminine, and conversely, the conditions needed for women to cross-type
The main limitations of the current study include sample size and sample
diversity. A small sample size in relation to the number of variables intended for use in
the regression analyses may have limited our power to detect significant findings.
Further, the limited diversity of our sample restricts the ability to generalize our results.
that are applicable to the general population. For example, college students may be more
Our findings suggest that the strong relationship between masculinity and
assertiveness is not absolute. Although our hypothesized mechanisms did not explain the
Thus, women low in masculinity but high in certain types of feminist ideologies, may
also be assertive, and thus reap the social and psychological benefits associated with
References
adjustment: implications for the masculinity model. Sex Roles, 12, 1211-1218.
Arrindell, W. A., Vergara, A. I., Torres, B., Caballo, V. E., Sanderman, R., Calvo, M.
Aube, J., Norcliffe, H., Craig, J., & Koestner, R. (1995). Gender characteristics and
Bassoff, E. S., & Glass, G. V. (1982). The relationship between sex roles and mental
105-112.
Baucom, D. H., & Danker-Brown, P. (1983). Peer ratings of males and females
47, 494-506.
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 28
Burn, S. M., Aboud, R., & Moyles, C. (2000). The relationship between gender
social identity and support for feminism. Sex Roles, 42, 1081-1089.
Campbell, M., Steffen, J. J., & Langmeyer, D. (1981). Psychological androgyny and
Carpenter, S., & Johnson, L. E. (2001). Women derive collective self-esteem from
Cowan, G., & Koziej, J. (1979). The perception of sex-inconsistent behavior. Sex
Roles, 5, 1-10.
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender.
586.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Pavot, W., & Fujita, F. (1992). Extraversion and subjective
Dua, J. K. (1993). The role of negative affect and positive affect in stress,
119, 515-552.
Fischer, A. R., Tokar, D. M., Mergl, M. M., Good, G. E., Hill, M. S., & Blum, S. A.
Fowler, M. G., Fowler, R. L., & Van de Riet, H. (1973). Feminism and political
Francis, L. J., & Wilcox, C. (1998). The relationship between Eysenck's personality
dimensions and Bem's masculinity and femininity scales revisited. Personality &
Francis, L. J., & Wilcox, C. (1999). Personality and sex role orientation among 17-
Frisch, M. B., & McCord, M. (1987). Sex role orientation and social skill: A
437-448.
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 31
25.
Gallois, C., Callan, V. J., & Palmer, J. M. (1992). The influence of applicant
Haimo, S., & Blitman, F. (1985) The effects of assertive training on sex role concept
Hall, J. A., & Taylor, M. C. (1985). Psychological androgyny and the Masculinity *
435.
Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Assessing the current validity of the Bem Sex-Role
Jordan-Viola, E., Fassberg, S., & Viola, M. T. (1976). Feminism, androgyny, and
Josephs, R. A., Markus, H. R., & Tafarodi R. W. (1992). Gender and self-esteem.
Kelly, J. A., & Worell, L. (1978). Personality characteristics, parent behaviors, and
179-188.
Kelly, J. A., & Worell, L. (1977). New formulations of sex roles and androgyny: A
Kimlicka, T. A., Sheppard, J. M., Wakefield, J. A., & Sheppard, P. L. (1988). The
Klonoff, E. A., & Landrine, H. (1992). Sex roles, occupational roles, and symptom-
Landrine, H., Bardwell, S., & Dean, T. (1988). Gender expectations for alcohol use:
A study of the significance of the masculine role. Sex Roles, 19, 703-712.
Lengua, L. J., & Stormshak, E. A. (2000). Gender, gender roles and personality:
Leventhal, G., & Matturo, M. (1981). Males' attitudes towards women: What they
Lewittes, H. J., & Bem, S. L. (1983). Training women to be more assertive in mixed-
Lippa, R., & Connelly, S. (1990). Gender diagnosticity: A new Bayesian approach to
Liss, M., O'Connor, C., Morosky, E., & Crawford, M. (2001). What makes a
Lohr, J. M., & Nix, J. (1982). Relationship of assertiveness and the short form of
Lu, L., & Shih, J. B. (1997). Personality and happiness: Is mental health a mediator?
Lubinski, D., Tellgen, A., & Butcher, J. N. (1981). The relationship between
Lubinski, D., Tellgen, A., & Butcher, J. N. (1983). Masculinity, femininity, and
Marusic, I., & Bratko, D. (1998). Relations of masculinity and femininity with
Nezu, A. M., & Nezu, C. M. (1987). Psychological distress, problem solving, and
Nix, J., Lohr, J. M., & Mosesso, L. (1984). The relationship of sex-role
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 35
Nix, J., Lohr, J. M., & Stauffacher, R. (1980). Relationship of sex, sex-role
Ramanaiah, N. V., & Detwiler, F. R. (1992). Psychological androgyny and the NEO
Renk, K., & Creasey, G. (2003). The relationship of gender, gender identity, and
Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57,
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 36
637-655.
Robins, C. J. (1986). Sex role perceptions and social anxiety in opposite-sex and
Rodriguez, R., Nietzel, M. T., & Berzins, J. I. (1980). Sex role-orientation and
Roth, L. J. (1996). Sex role attitudes among female alcoholics: Changes due to an
Sazan, G. (1995). Iranian Jewish immigrant women living in the United States: The
55B, 5086.
Smith, C. J., Noll, J. A., & Bryant, J. B. (1999). The effect of social context on
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex-
Spence, J. T. (1984). Gender identity and its implications for the concepts of
Stoppard, J. M., & Paisley, K. J. (1987). Masculinity, femininity, life stress, and
St. Lawrence, J. S., Hansen, D. J., Cutts, T. F., Tisdelle, D. A., & Irish, J. D. (1985).
Whitley, B. E., & Gridley, B. (1993). Sex role orientation, self-esteem, and
Wilcox, C., & Francis, L. J. (1997). Beyond gender stereotyping: Examining the
validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory among 16- to 19-year old females in
Zeldow, P. B., Daugherty, S. R., & Clark, D. C. (1987). Masculinity, femininity, and
606.
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 39
Tables
Appendices
Appendix A
Description of Study: I am being asked to participate in a research project in which I will fill out
questionnaires asking about my personality and beliefs. In addition, my roommate or friend will also fill out
questionnaires asking about my personality. I will receive one credit once both sets of completed
questionnaires are returned to the Psychology Department office in St. Joseph’s 329.
Confidentiality of Data: I understand that my name and e-mail address will be retained for the purpose of
contacting me for the debriefing. My responses will be assigned a number; therefore my response will not be
identifiable by my name. A sheet with my name, email address, and code will be stored in a locked file
cabinet separate from my actual responses. This sheet will be destroyed upon my completion of this study.
Contact Person: If I have any questions concerning my participation in this study now or in the future, Dr.
Lutz can be contacted at (937) 229-2164, by e-mail at Catherine.Lutz@notes.udayton.edu, or in St. Joseph's
308. The chair of the Research Review and Ethics Committee, Dr. Charles Kimble, can be reached at (937)
229-2167 or in St. Joseph's 319.
Consent to Participate: I have voluntarily decided to participate in this study. The investigator named
above has adequately answered any and all questions I have about this study, the procedures involved, and
my participation. I understand that the investigator named above will be available to answer any questions
about research procedures throughout this study. I also understand that I may voluntarily terminate my
participation in this study at any time and still receive full credit. I also understand that the investigator
named above may terminate my participation in this study if s/he feels this to be in my best interest. In
addition, I certify that I am 18 (eighteen) years of age or older.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Signature of Student Student's Name (printed) Date
_______________________________________________________________________________
Signature of Witness
Appendix B
Demographic Information
1. What is your age?
______________
3. Which of the following best describes your ethnic background? Choose one.
____ Black or African American
____ Hispanic
____ White or Caucasian
____ Asian or Pacific Islander
____ Arab
____ Native American
--------------------------------------------------------------
Your name:
Appendix C
5. Which of the following best describes your ethnic background? Choose one.
____ Black or African American
____ Hispanic
____ White or Caucasian
____ Asian or Pacific Islander
____ Arab
____ Native American
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 44
Appendix D
ASST-R
People think a variety of things when they are responding in different situations. These
thoughts, along with feelings, determine what kind of responses a person will make.
Below is a list of things you may have thought to yourself at some time while responding
in assertive situations. Read each item and decide how frequently you may have been
thinking a similar thought during the assertive situations.
Circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item. The scale is interpreted as follows:
1 = Hardly ever had the thought
2 = Rarely had the thought
3 = Sometimes had the thought
4 = Often had the thought
5 = Very often had the thought
2. I was thinking that the other person would suspect an ulterior motive if I said
anything.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
3. I was thinking that the other person should respect an honest expression of
feelings.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
4. I was thinking that many people fail to get involved to stand up for themselves in
similar situations, so there is nothing wrong with my keeping quiet.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
6. I was thinking that I should act in accord with what I think is right.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
7. I was thinking that if I could avoid this situation, I could somehow relieve my
discomfort.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
10. I was thinking that I would appear incompetent or inadequate if I tried to take a
stand.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
11. I was thinking that something bad would happen to me if I tried to express myself.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
12. I was thinking that the other person wouldn't like me if I offered my opinion.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
13. I was thinking that my opinions and decisions should be respected if they are
reasonable.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
14. I was thinking that since letting my feelings be known was an effective course of
action in the past, I should do likewise now.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
15. I was thinking that I would only be hurting myself by not expressing myself.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
16. I was thinking that future interactions with the other person might be damaged if
I didn't say what I felt now.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
17. I was thinking that since similar past experience resulted in failure or
ineffectiveness, I shouldn't bother to say anything now.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
18. I was thinking that I would probably feel guilty later if I refused to do the person
a favor.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
19. I was thinking that there didn't seem to be a good reason why I shouldn't speak
my mind.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
20. I was thinking that I would become embarrassed if I let my feelings be known.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
21. I was thinking that if I didn't state my opinion now, it might cause problems later
on.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 46
23. I was thinking that if I didn't speak up, it will interfere with my plans.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
24. I was thinking that a friendly person would not impose his or her views in this
situation.
Hardly ever 1 2 3 4 5 Very Often
Feminist Identity and Attitudes 47
Appendix E
AI
Step 1: Many people experience difficulty in handling interpersonal situations requiring
them to assert themselves in some way, for example, turning down a request or asking a
favor. Please indicate your degree of discomfort or anxiety in the space provided to the
left of each situation listed below.
Step 2: Once you have completed this, go over the list a second time and indicate to the
right of each item the probability or likelihood of responding as described if actually
presented with the situation.* For example, if you rarely apologize when you are at fault,
you would mark "4" to the right of that item. Use the following scale to indicate response
probability:
1 - Always do it
2 - Usually do it
3 - Do it about half the time
4 - Rarely do it
5 - Never do it
Step 3: Please indicate the situations you would like to handle more assertively by
placing a circle around the item number.
*NOTE: It is important to assess your discomfort rating apart from your response probability.
Otherwise, one may influence the other. To prevent this, place a piece of paper over your
discomfort ratings while responding to the situation a second time for response probability.
Appendix F
Step 2: Once you have completed this, go over the list a second time and indicate to the
right of each item your perception of the probability or likelihood of your study
partner responding as described if actually presented with the situation.* For example,
if she rarely apologizes when she is at fault, you would mark "4" to the right of that item.
Use the following scale to indicate response probability:
1 - Always do it
2 - Usually do it
3 - Do it about half the time
4 - Rarely do it
5 - Never do it
Step 3: Please indicate the situations you think your study partner should handle more
assertively by placing a circle around the item number.
*NOTE: It is important to assess the discomfort rating apart from the response probability.
Otherwise, one may influence the other. To prevent this, place a piece of paper over your
discomfort ratings while responding to the situation a second time for response probability.
Appendix G
BSRI
Indicate how well each of these 60 personality characteristics describes you on the line to the left
of the word. Use the following rating scale:
Appendix H
FIDS
Please indicate your own personal feelings about each statement below by marking
the number that best describes your attitude or feeling.
1 – Strongly Agree
2 – Moderately Agree
3 – Neutral
4 – Moderately Disagree
5 – Strongly Disagree
1. I am very committed to a cause that I believe contributes to a more fair and just
world for all people.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
5. I care very deeply about men and women having equal opportunities in all
respects.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
7. I feel that I am a very powerful and effective spokesperson for the women’s
issues I am concerned with right now.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
9. I owe it not only to women but to all people to work for greater opportunity
and equality for all.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
10. I feel like I have blended my female attributes with my unique personal
qualities.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
Feminist Identity 53
13. I have incorporated what is female and feminine into my own unique
personality.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
14. I enjoy the pride and self-assurance that comes from being a strong female.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
15. As I have grown in my beliefs I have realized that it is more important to value
women as individuals than as members of a larger group of women.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
16. If I were to paint a picture or write a poem, it would probably be about women
or women’s issues.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
17. Gradually, I am beginning to see just how sexist society really is.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
18. I feel angry when I think about the way I am treated by men and boys.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
19. Men receive many advantages in society and because of this are against
equality for women.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
20. I never realized until recently that I have experienced oppression and
discrimination as a woman in society.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
21. I feel like I’ve been duped into believing society’s perceptions of me as a
woman.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
22. My female friends are like me in that we all are angry at men and the ways we
have been treated as women.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
24. Regretfully, I can see ways in which I have perpetuated sexist attitudes in the
past.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
Feminist Identity 54
28. I don’t see much point in questioning the general expectation that men should
be masculine and women should be feminine.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
29. One thing I especially like about being a woman is that men will offer me their
seat on a crowded bus or open doors for me because I am a woman.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
31. I think that men and women had it better in the 1950s when married women
were housewives and their husbands supported them.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
32. If I were married to a man and my husband was offered a job in another state,
it would be my obligation to move in support of his career.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
33. I think that most women will feel most fulfilled by being a wife and mother.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
34. I think it’s lucky that women aren’t expected to do some of the more dangerous
jobs that men are expected to do, like construction work or race car driving.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
37. I just feel like I need to be around women who share my point of view right
now.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree
39. I share most of my social time with a few close women friends who share my
feminist values.
Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree