Masculine gender role stress and intimate abuse: Effects of gender relevance of conflict situations on men's attributions and affective responses.

Eisler, Richard M.; Franchina, Joseph J.; Moore, Todd M.; Honeycutt, Hunter; Rhatigan, Deborah L.

doi:10.1037/1524-9220.1.1.30

Cited by 62 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A good example of research that did allow for testing the direction of a relationship was a study by Eisler, Franchina, Moore, Honeycutt, and Rhatigan (2000). In this study, the researchers sought to test the effect of gender-relevance on men's attributions about relationship conflict.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten Years of Psychological Research on Men and Masculinity in the United States: Dominant Methodological Trends

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The psychological study of men and masculinity is rapidly growing. Despite this growth, few attempts have been made to critically evaluate progress in the field, and no studies to date have analyzed methodological trends in empirical research on men and masculinity. The purpose of this study was to identify the dominant trends in psychological research on men and masculinity published in the United States between 1995 and 2004. One hundred seventy-eight articles were selected and coded on 21 dimensions. Descriptive statistics revealed that quantitative, correlational, and nonobservational methods dominate research in this field. Further, the inclusion of racial/ethnic minorities was found to be quite low and researchers tended to rely on convenience samples of undergraduates. It also appears that there was little variety in the masculinity measures used. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.Keywords Masculinity . Men . Methodology . Research . ReviewResearch in the field of men and masculinity is new and rapidly growing in the United States. In the last 6 years, several journals have been founded that are dedicated to the study of men and masculinity (Smiler, 2004). In addition, the last 10 years have shown increased representation of men and masculinity researchers in the American Psychological Association and the start of an APA division dedicated to the psychological study of men and masculinity. The psychology of men has also become increasingly visible in the American popular media, with such publications as the New York Times and Newsweek covering stories about men and depression, men's health, and other related topics. Finally, the larger field of mental health has gained awareness of the significance of studying the psychology of men and masculinity. For example, the National Institute of Mental Health has acknowledged the importance of this field by introducing a campaign called "Real Men, Real Depression" that seeks to educate people about men's suffering. In short, the last decade has seen a dramatic increase in the amount of social scientific theory and empirical research focused on the psychology of men and masculinity.Despite increased interest in the psychology of men and masculinity, few comprehensive reviews have been pubto our knowledge there have been no reviews and critiques of methodological trends in particular. The purpose of the current article is to review methodological trends in psychological research on men and masculinity published in major US journals over the last 10 years. We chose to focus our review on research published in major US journals for several reasons. First, space constraints required narrowing the boundaries of the review. Second, and more importantly, research published in these outlets is likely to reflect the dominant methodological and conceptual trends in psychology more broadly, and these trends in turn shape the way research on men and masculinity is conceptualized and carried out. Third, dominant methodologies in any field tend to...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten Years of Psychological Research on Men and Masculinity in the United States: Dominant Methodological Trends

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, the rest of the studies analysed male domination in the family through excessive control over the partner and the presence of extreme jealousy (Eisler et al, 2000;Ellsberg et al, 2000). All the studies found a relationship between IPV and male domination in the family or verbal marital conflict, except the oldest study (Neidig et al, 1986) (Table 1).…”

Section: Logistic Regressionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Verbal Marital Conflict and Male Domination in the Family as Risk Factors of Intimate Partner Violence

Vives‐Cases

Gil‐González

Carrasco‐Portiño

2009

Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A systematic review was performed to analyse the characteristics and quality of the studies that consider the relationship between verbal marital conflict and/or male domination in the family and violent behaviour by men towards their partner. Only 11 articles were identified between 1986 and 2006. Most of them find a positive association between male domination in the family and/or verbal marital conflict and violence towards the woman in the couple. However, limitations such as misclassification bias, recall bias, selection bias, external validity and the problem of consistency (overestimation of effect) were acknowledged by authors of this studies. In eight of the 11 studies reviewed, preventive measures or interventions to deal with the problem were recommended. More and better empirical evidence is required in order to provide suitable measures to address the issue of verbal marital conflict and male domination and its influence on IPV.

show abstract

“…Masculine gender role stress (Eisler and Skidmore 1987) is defined as the tendency to cognitively appraise gender relevant situations as threatening or stressful. These situations include gender relevant conflict or situations that require defense of personal and societal standards of a more hegemonic masculinity (Copenhaver, Lash, and Eisler 2000; Eisler and Skidmore 1987; Eisler, Franchina, Moore, Honeycutt, and Rhatigan 2000; Eisler, Skidmore, and Ward 1988; Lash, Eisler, and Schulnian 1990). Specific to intimate relationships, men who consistently exhibit these biased appraisal processes are more likely to feel threatened, use verbal aggression, experience negative affect (e.g., anger, anxiety), and attribute negative intent to female intimate partners during gender-relevant conflict situations (Franchina, Eisler, and Moore 2001; Moore and Stuart 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Demonstrating Masculinity” Via Intimate Partner Aggression: The Moderating Effect of Heavy Episodic Drinking

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to examine the mediational effect of masculine gender role stress on the relation between adherence to dimensions of a hegemonic masculinity and male-to-female intimate partner physical aggression. Men’s history of heavy episodic drinking was also examined as a moderator of the proposed mediation effect. A sample of 392 heterosexual men from the southeastern United States who had been in an intimate relationship within the past year completed measures of hegemonic masculine norms (i.e., status, toughness, and antifemininity), masculine gender role stress, alcohol use patterns, and intimate partner physical aggression. Results indicated that the indirect effects of adherence to the antifemininity and toughness norms on physical aggression toward female intimate partners via masculine gender role stress were significant and marginal, respectively. A significant indirect effect of status was not detected. Moreover, subsequent analyses revealed that the indirect effects of antifemininity and toughness were significant only among men with a history of heavy episodic drinking. These findings suggest that heavy episodic drinking exacerbates a gender-relevant stress pathway for intimate partner aggression among men who adhere to specific norms of masculinity. Overall, results suggest that the proximal effect of heavy episodic drinking focuses men’s attention on gender-based schemas associated with antifemininity and toughness, which facilitates partner-directed aggression as a means to demonstrate these aspects of their masculinity. Implications for the intersection between men’s adherence to specific norms of hegemonic masculinity, cognitive appraisal of gender relevant situations, and characteristic patterns of alcohol consumption are discussed.

show abstract

Masculine gender role stress and intimate abuse: Effects of gender relevance of conflict situations on men's attributions and affective responses.

Cited by 62 publications

References 16 publications

Ten Years of Psychological Research on Men and Masculinity in the United States: Dominant Methodological Trends

Ten Years of Psychological Research on Men and Masculinity in the United States: Dominant Methodological Trends

Verbal Marital Conflict and Male Domination in the Family as Risk Factors of Intimate Partner Violence

“Demonstrating Masculinity” Via Intimate Partner Aggression: The Moderating Effect of Heavy Episodic Drinking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About