Confirmatory Factor Analyses

Section Menu

Confirmatory and Principle Components Factor Analyses of the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) By Diverse Group and Country

Many researchers have studied the factor structure of the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS). Twenty-four factor analyses have been completed on the GRCS to document its factorial validity. Nine principle components factor analyses of the GRCS with American college students have shown the scale to have construct validity (See References Below). The factor intercorrelations are moderate with intercorrelations ranging from .35 to .68 (Moradi et al., 2000), implying that the factors are related to each other but are separate entities.
Researchers have suggested using confirmatory factor analysis to strengthen the GRC model conceptually and give greater support for the subscales (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1994). Eighteen studies have used confirmatory factor analyses in verifying the four factor structure (See references below). Rogers and his colleagues questioned whether past confirmatory factor analyses met the conventional criteria for acceptable model-fit data (Rogers et al., 1997) and recommended that certain items be rewritten or dropped to make the GRCS more pure and to improve the goodness-of-fit indices . Other researchers questioned whether past studies , considered how the value of fit indexes were influenced by indicator-per-factor (p/f) ratios (Moradi, et al., 2000). In their study, Moradi et al. (2000) used rationally and randomly derived parceling procedures to assess this question. These researchers found strong support for the structural validity of the GRCS and concluded that the original four factor model could be used with confidence. Overall, these important confirmatory factors analyses support the four factor model as initially hypothesized (O’Neil et al., 1986).
Another criticism of the GRCS has been the lack of factorial validity studies on diverse samples from various racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups as well as men who are gay, physically challenged, or from other countries (Good et al., 1995, Heppner, 1995, Moradi et al., 2000). Heppner (1995) critiqued the GRCS and argued that “additional examination of the factor structure across diverse samples and cultures offers a great deal of potential for increasing the understanding of the universality of GRC as well as for stimulating theory development about human nature in general” (p. 21). Furthermore, researchers have recommended testing the structural validity of the GRCS on under researched samples such as African Americans, Latinos, gay men, and bisexual men (Moradi et al., 2000).

Table 1 lists factor analyses of the GRCS for diverse groups of men.

Groups	References
White Men	O’Neil al. 1986; Good et al., 1995; Rogers et al., 1997
African American	Norwalk et al., 2011
Hispanic, African American, Asian American	Pytluk & Casas, 1998
Chinese Adult (heterosexual & gay)	Zhang et al., 2014
Bisexual African American	del Pino, 2021
Gay American	Alt et al., 2014 Herdman et al, 2012; Simonsen, et al; 2000; Wester et al., 2005; Hernandez et al., 2006, Zhang et al, 2014
Lesbians	Herdman et al., 2012
Women	Borthick, 1997; Borthick et al., 1997
Adolescent American Boys	Blazina et al, 2005
Spanish Adolescent Boys	Larranaga et al., 2013
Chinese Adolescent Boys	Lu et al., 2015
Adult American	Lontz, 2000
Airline Pilots	Chamberlin, 1993

GRCS has been factor analyzed using diverse samples of men living outside the United States. Table 2 shows the factor analyses for men outside the United States in 14 counties.

Table 2 Factor Analyses of the GRCS for on Men In Different Countries

Country	Reference
United States	O’Neil al. 1986; Good et al., 1995; Rogers et al., 1997
Australia	Theodore, 1998
Portugal	Faria, 2000
Korea	Kim et al., 2003
Japan	Hayashi, 1999
Sweden	Bjerke & Skllingstad, 2002
Germany	Kolmec, Stiller, Bliem, Hochleitner 2018; Gulder, 1999
China	Zhang et al., 2014; Lu, Kang, Zheng, Liu, & Shao, 2015
Canada	Chartier, Graft, & Arnold, 1986
Turkey	Lease et al., 2005
Indonesia	Nauly, 2003
Spain	Garcia-Sanchez et al, 2018; Larranaga et al., 2013
Greece	Daoultzis & Kordoutis, 2023
Ireland	O’Beglovich, Conway, Morrison, 2014
Poland	Barecki, 2013

With all of these diverse and international samples, researchers have found a similar factor structure to the initial study of men’s GRC (O’Neil et al., 1986). The variance explained in these factor analyses across the studies ranges between 32% and 52%. In a few of these studies less than perfect replication of the factor structure was found but only minor differences were reported. In all the studies, the researchers reported that the psychometric qualities of the GRCS were acceptable for use with their samples.

Confirmatory and Principle Components Factor Analyses of the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) References

Confirmatory Factor Analyses

Alt, M., Lewis, A.M., Liu, W.M., Vilain, E., Sanchez, F.G. (2014). On the validity of popular masculinity rating scales with gay men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43,1547-1557.

Daoultzis, K. C., & Kordoutis, P. (2023, ). Psychometric properties of the Gender Role Conflict – Short form (GRC-SF) in straight and gay Greek men. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships.

Englar-Carlson M., & Vandiver, B. (2002, August). Comparing the dimensionality of the GRCS, MGRS, and SRES. In J. M. O’Neil & G. E. Good (Chairs), Gender role conflict research: Empirical Studies and 20 year summary. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL

Faria, M. (2000). Analysis of the components of gender role conflict. ULHT, Lisboa, Mestrado de Sexologia, Lisbon, Portugual.

Garcia-Sanchez, R., Almendros, C., Gamez-Guadix, M., Martin, M.J., Aramayona, B., & Martinez, J.M. (2018). Assessment of conflicts associated with a traditional masculine gender role in Spanish college men and women. Sex Roles, 78: 81-93 DOI 10.1007/s11199-017-0765-8.

Good, G.E., Robertson, J.M., O’Neil, J.M., Fitzgerald, L.F., Stevens, M., DeBord, K., Bartels, K.M., & Braverman, D.G. (1995). Male gender role conflict: Psychometric issues and relations to psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 3-10.

Hernandez, J., Sanchez, F.J. & Liu, W.M. (2006, August). Factorial validity of the Gender Role Conflict Scale with gay men. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Gender Role Conflict Research and Diversity: Sexual orientation, physical injuries, and nationality. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA

Herdman, K.J., Choi, N., Fuqua, D. R. & Newmans, J.L. (2012). Gender role conflict: Validation for a sample of gay men and lesbian women. Psychological Reports, 110, 227-232.

Komenac, N., Siller, H., Bliem, H.R. & Hochleitner, M. (2018). Validation of the internal structure of a German-language version of the Gender Role Conflict Scale- Short Form. Frontier in Psychology, 9, 1161- ??? doi 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01161.

Kratzner, R.E. (2003). Gender role conflict, instrumentality-expressiveness, personality, and psychological distress. (Masters thesis, Department of Psychology, St. Louis University), St. Louis, Missouri.

.Larranaga, E., Yubero, S., Ovejero, A., & Navarro, R. (2013). Validation of the Spanish version Gender Role Conflict Scale for Adolescents (GRCS-A). Anales de Psicologia, 29, 549-557.

Lu, Q., Kang, X., Li, X., Zheng, H., Liu, X., & Shao, C. (2015). Revision of the gender role conflict scale adolescent for Chinese adolescent. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1, 17-21.

Moradi, B., Tokar, D.M., Schaub, M. Jome, L.M. & Serna, G.S. (2000). Revisiting the structural validity of the gender role conflict scale. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 1, 62-69.

Norwalk, K.E., Vandiver, B.J., White, A.M., Englar-Carlson , M. (2011). Factor structure of the Gender Role Conflict Scale in African American and European American men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 12, 128-143.

O’Beaglaoich, C., Conway, R., & Morrison, T.G. (2014). Psychometric properties of the Gender Role Conflict Scale for Adolescents among Irish boys. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. DOI 10.1037/a0036018.

Roger, J.R., Abbey-Hines, J., Rando, R.A. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Gender Role Conflict Scale: A cross validation of Good et at al., 1995 (1997). Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30, 137-145.

Wester, S.R., Pionke, D.R. & Vogel, D.L. (2005) Male gender role conflict, gay men, and same-sex romantic relationships. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 6, 195-208.

Zhang, C., Blashill, A.J., Wester, S.R., O’Neil, J.M, Vogel, D.L., Wei, J., & Zhang, J. (2014). Factor structure of the Gender Role conflict Scale-Short From in Chinese heterosexual and gay samples. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 16, 229-233.

Principle Components Factor Analyses

Del Pino, H.E. Steers, W.N., Lee, M., McCullen, J., Hays, R.D. Harawa, N.T. (2021). Measuring gender role conflict, internalized stigma, and racial and sexual identity in behaviorally bisexual Black men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, http://link. Springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-021-01925-w.

Englar-Carlson M., & Vandiver, B. (2002, August). Comparing the dimensionality of the GRCS, MGRS, and SRES. In J. M. O’Neil & G. E. Good (Chairs), Gender role conflict research: Empirical Studies and 20 year summary. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.

Moradi, B., Tokar, D.M., Schaub, M. Jome, L.M. & Serna, G.S. (2000). Revisiting the structural validity of the gender role conflict scale. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 1, 62-69.

O’Neil, J.M., Helms, B., Gable, R., David, L., & Wrightsman, L. (1986). Gender-role conflict scale: College men’s fear of femininity. Sex Roles, 14, 335-350.

Theodore, H. (1998). The relationship between gender role conflict and psychological well being across the life span: A cross sectional study of Australian men. Honors Thesis in Psychology. Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia.