Most Masculinity Tests Focus On Toxic Traits, Major Review Finds

The tools psychologists use to measure masculinity focus overwhelmingly on negative traits and harmful outcomes, a major review has found. Research published in Men and Masculinities examined 65 psychological questionnaires published between 1974 and 2021. The review, titled What Is the Measure of a Man? A Systematic Scoping Review of 50 Years of Masculinities Scales, was led by researchers at the Movember Institute of Men's Health.

The findings suggest that psychology's standard measurement tools may offer an incomplete picture of how gender identity works in men's everyday lives.

To study how beliefs about manhood relate to health and behaviour, psychologists rely on masculinity scales. These are standardised questionnaires where respondents rate their agreement with statements about how men should think, feel or act.

By the 1990s and early 2000s, many new scales shifted toward measuring adherence to rigid social rules. They asked how strongly people endorse expectations like emotional toughness, self-reliance, and dominance.

Many of these modern questionnaires grew out of the theory of gender role strain. The idea is that trying to live up to narrow or contradictory expectations of manhood causes psychological distress for men and harms the people around them.

Because researchers designed these scales to identify social and health problems, higher masculinity scores were almost always expected to predict worse outcomes. For instance, a 2017 meta-analysis found that men who strictly conform to traditional masculine norms tend to experience poorer mental health and are less likely to seek psychological help.

The review found that 78 per cent of measures adopted a more deficit-based approach, while only 22 per cent incorporated strengths-based elements. Most measures also showed limited focus on relationships and social context, and limited cultural attunement.

In addition, 66 per cent relied on samples lacking demographic diversity. Psychometric findings were mixed. Internal validity and reliability were generally adequate, but only 9 per cent of measures demonstrated strong evidence for external validity.

Focusing on the harms of rigid gender norms has helped researchers study issues like depression, substance misuse and interpersonal violence. Yet some scholars have questioned whether relying only on this negative lens overlooks positive or adaptive sides of men's lives.

Supporting that concern, a 2020 content analysis of studies published over 18 years in the journal Psychology of Men and Masculinities found that only 15 per cent focused on positive aspects of men's functioning.

Dr Christian Blotner and Soren Michallek, researchers in the Department of Psychology at FernUniversitat in Hagen who were not involved in the study, told PsyPost: "The most important takeaway is that most of those tools were designed to identify negative aspects or the problems associated with masculinity. There is a dearth of assessment tools, however, that emphasise the potential strengths concomitant with masculinity."

The authors argue that future tools need to better capture strengths such as caring, generative fatherhood, courage, humour, humanitarian service and healthy relationships, along with culture and social context, to give a fuller picture of masculinity.