Published in 1997 in SPSMM Bulletin, Vol 3 (#1) pp. 10-15
James M. O’Neil, Ph.D., School of Family Studies, University of Connecticut,
Glenn E. Good, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, University of Missouri-Columbia
Men’s Gender Role Conflict: Personal Reflections and Overview of Recent Research (1994-1997)
We appreciate the invitation to summarize the gender role research program for member of SPSMM. We have collaborated on this research program since Glenn’s dissertation in 1986. We have grown immensely from our work together and created a deep fondness which is difficult to put into words. Moreover, the research program has brought us in contact with hundreds of students and colleagues across the country over the last 15 years. We are fully indebted to the 80+ colleagues who have conducted research on gender role conflict. Their hard work has made gender role conflict a meaningful area of scholarly inquiry and professional dialogue. In this brief article, we discuss our research journey over the years and summarize 24 studies that have used the Gender Role Conflict Scale from 1994 to the present. A summary of 35 studies from 1983-1993 is available elsewhere and therefore will not be repeated here (see O’Neil, Good, Holmes, 1995 specifically in Ron Levant’s and Bill Pollack’s book, The New Psychology of Men (Basic Books, 1995).
Creation of the Gender Role Conflict Construct: Jim’s Process
The gender role conflict construct was created in the late 1970’s when I was researching the sources of sexism in women’s lives. I knew there was widespread sexism, discrimination, violence against women but could not explain why men were sexist. I began to read the Men’s Movement literature, particularly the writings of Joe Pleck, Bob Brannon, Warren Farrell, Herb Goldberg, Jim Harrison, to name just a few. These authors gave me hope that a new, nonsexist, definition of masculinity could be created that might decrease sexism between men and women. On a personal level, I was just beginning to face my own sexism and gender role conflict issues. I was regularly confronted by some radical Feminists who believed that all men were oppressors and exclusively blamed all men for the widespread sexism in our society. These were difficult and lonely days for men who were trying to understand the women’s movement and men’s part in women’s oppression. Verbal attacks on men were very frequent and unpleasant. Most of us were on the defensive because we had very few answers to the many good questions that Feminists were asking.
I knew that there must be some psychological, familial, or political reason why men were sexist. It seemed just a little more complex than reducing all men to innate oppressors and misogynists. I needed factual information and concepts about sexism and men’s gender role socialization to respond to the questions being asked.
To deal with my knowledge gap, I reviewed the popular and social science literature on men. Back in those days, you could read everything that existed on men’s liberation in a couple of months. The social science literature on men was very limited. Nowhere in the literature was there operationally defined, empirically proven, concepts that explained men’s conflict with their gender roles. Linda Garnent’s and Joe Pleck’s sex role strain model was the only scholarly paper that conceptualized sex role strain (Garnets & Pleck, 1979).
Reviewing the literature stimulated a frank assessment of my own personal gender role problems and sexism. It was impossible to read the men’s liberation literature in the 1970’s without asking some pretty significant issues about one’s own gender role conflict. I remember during my reading, getting depressed, anxious, and saying: This stuff is about me and my life!.
From all of this, came an increased energy and commitment to vigorously pursue men’s issues personally and by presenting ideas at national conferences. I wanted to see what the reactions might be and create a network of colleagues to work on men’s issues.
I got started with this networking when Murray Scher invited me to present my first paper on men at the 1979 ACPA convention in Los Angeles. Working with Murray and a handful of other men, we created the ACPA Standing Committee on Men. This committee was the springboard for convention presentations and publications. The most notable presentation was at the 1980 APA convention in Montreal where we presented the symposium Sex Role conflicts, sexism, masculinity: Psychological implications for counseling psychologists (O’Neil, Skovholt, Scher, Birk, Hanson, Collison, 1980). On the last day of the convention, we had 70 psychologists in the audience listening to six papers on men’s sex role conflict. There was a special stir of unusual excitement, tension and energy in the room. In the middle of one of the presentations, the presenter casually mentioned that he had brought his paper to disseminate at the end of the symposia. Spontaneously, there was a storm of people frantically rushing to the front of the room to grab the paper. This frenzy totally disrupted the symposium for at least 10 minutes. After that reaction, there was little doubt in my mind that gender role conflict was a relevant topic that would eventually be of interest to psychology!
I set my goal of having three theoretical papers published on gender role conflict in major journals or books (O’Neil, 1981a, 1981b; 1982). After that, my mentor at that time, Professor Larry Wrightsman, an eminent social psychologist who liked the gender role conflict construct, challenged me to empirically assess it through a quantitative measure. I was reluctant at first, not having much test construction background and knowing it would be difficult psychometric work. With a grant from the University of Kansas and Joe’s Pleck’s (1981) recently published sex role strain model in hand, we began to develop the Gender Role Conflict Scale in early 1981. The scale was finally published five years later in the journal Sex Roles (O’Neil, Helms, Gable, David, Wrightsman, 1986)
Glenn’s Experience with the Gender Role Conflict Scale
As an undergraduate student in California in the early 1970’s, I came in contact with the early writings of the Berkeley Men’s Center. I also attended an innovative multimedia presentation on men’s socialization developed by Dr. Rick Eigenbrod, then a psychologist at the university counseling center. From this initial exposure to men’s issues, I developed an active interest in the processes and consequences of gender socialization as it related to my life, and the lives of my friends, family members, and clients. About a decade later, as a doctoral student with an interest in gender issues searching for a dissertation topic, Dr. Nancy Betz mentioned a new scale (then called the Fear of Femininity Scale) being developed by Dr. James M. O’Neil. With significant trepidation (known only too well by graduate students), I contacted Dr. O’Neil who sounded — much to my surprise — pleased by my inquiry! Further, to my excitement, the GRCS operationalized key dimensions of masculine role conflict that were (and remain) of interest to me. However, at that time, I perceived the field of Men’s Studies to be clearly outside the range of mainstream psychological research and practice. As I wanted to leave open the option of going into academia (although I planned to be a practitioner), I elected to study men’s gender role conflict in relation to mainstream psychological constructs like depression and the utilization of psychological services. In 1988, Jim invited me to present these findings at the APA convention in Atlanta, Georgia. He has been kind enough to allow me to collaborate with him ever since that time.
Gender Role Conflict Definitions and Concepts
A full explanation of gender role conflict theory is found in a recent book chapter (O’Neil et al., 1995). Only the basic definitions and concepts are summarized below. Gender role conflict is a psychological state in which socialized gender roles have negative consequences on the person or others. Gender role conflict occurs when rigid, sexist, or restricted gender roles result in restriction, devaluations, or violations of others or self (O’Neil, 1981, 1982, 1990). Gender role conflict implies cognitive, emotional, unconscious, or behavioral problems caused by socialized gender roles learned in sexist and patriarchal societies. Boys and men experience gender role conflict in situational contexts including when they: 1) deviate from or violate gender role norms (Pleck, 1981); 2) try to meet or fail to meet gender role norms of masculinity; 3) experience discrepancies between their real self-concepts and their ideal self concepts, based on gender role stereotypes (Garnets & Pleck, 1979); 4) personally devalue, restrict, or violate themselves (O’Neil, 1990, O’Neil, Fishman, Kinsella-Shaw, 1987); 5) experience personal devaluations, restrictions, or violations from others (O’Neil, 1990; O’Neil, et al., 1987),; 6) personally devalue, restrict, or violate others because of gender role stereotypes (O’Neil, 1990; O’Neil, et al., 1987).
Early conceptualizations of men’s gender role conflict were hypothesized to relate to men’s gender role socialization, the Masculine Mystique and Value System, men’s fears of femininity, and both personal and institutional sexism. Six patterns of gender role conflict were originally hypothesized as shown in Figure 1. Restrictive emotionality, health care problems, obsession with achievement and success, restrictive sexual and affectionate behavior between men, socialized control power, and competition issues, and homophobia were the original patterns of gender role conflict. These six patterns of gender role conflict were used to generate the Gender Role Conflict Scale.
The Gender Role Conflict Scale
Using the above theoretical concepts, an empirically derived measure was created in the Fall of 1981. Using factor analysis and other statistical procedures, four patterns of gender role conflict received empirical support (O’Neil et al., 1986). These four gender role conflict patterns include: a) success, power, and competition, 2) restrictive emotionality, 3) restrictive affectionate behavior between men, 4) conflict between work and family relations. The Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) is a 37 item measure that assesses directly or indirectly men’s conflicts with the four patterns of gender role conflict mentioned above. Respondents are asked to report the degree to which they agree or disagree with statements, using a six point Likert scale ranging from strongly agree (6) to strongly disagree (1). Example of items include: I have difficulty expressing my tender feelings; Making money is part of my idea of being a successful man; Affection with other men makes me tense. The psychometric data on the GRCS is accumulating with common, principle components, and confirmatory factor analyses demonstrating a stable factor structure (O’Neil et al., 1986; Good, Robertson, et al., 1995) and acceptable reliabilities. A complete summary of the scale’s psychometrics and development can be found elsewhere (O’Neil et al., 1986; O’Neil, et al.,1995). A complete listing of the studies using the GRCS can be found in a lengthy bibliography that is available upon request (See O’Neil, 1997 in reference list).
Empirical Studies Using the Gender Role Conflict Scale (1994 to Present)
There have been over 70 studies using the GRCS (O’Neil, 1997). We categorized the research over the last the three years into the following gender role conflict research areas: a) men’s psychological health, b) men’s interpersonal behavior, c) diversity and special groups, d) sexual harassment and assault against women, e) therapist gender role conflict and changing gender role conflict. The following abbreviations of the patterns of gender role conflict will be used through the review: SPC = Success, Power, Competition Issues; RE = Restrictive Emotionality; RABBM = Restrictive Affectionate Behavior Between Men; CBWFR = Conflict Between Work and Family Relations.
Men’s Psychological Health and Gender Role Conflict
Six studies have assessed gender role conflict with a variety of psychological health variables. Blazina and Watkins (1996) found that the two patterns of gender role conflict, specifically SPC and RE, related to multiple predictors of students’ psychological health. They found that students reporting greater RE had decreased psychological well being including more anxiety, more anger, and greater similarity to personality styles of chemical abusers. Furthermore, they found men reporting SPC issues had decreased psychological well being including more anger and increased of alcohol use. Finally, both RE and SPC issues predicted negative views of seeking help.
Two studies have studied the patterns of gender role conflict and alexithymia of college students. Fischer and Good (1995) found that SPS, RE, RABBM, and CBWFR each significantly contributed to the prediction of men’s overall alexithymia and to their ability to talk about (describe) their emotions, even after controlling for socially desirable responding. Shepard (1994 a,b) also found that gender role conflict was associated with men’s inability to process feelings. He found that male college students’ alexithymia was significantly related to RE, SPC, and RABBM. Shepard’s research provides evidence that as gender role conflict increases so does alexithymia.
Two studies have looked at men’s psychological stress and patterns of gender role conflict. In the first study to use counseling center clients, Good, Robertson, et al., (1996) found that clients’ 1) RE and SPC issues significantly predicted paranoia; 2) RE predicted interpersonal insensitivity and psychoticism; 3) RE and CBWFR predicted depression; and 4) CBWFR predicted obsessive- compulsivity. Van Delft and Birk (1996) found using a sample of men in the military, that psychological distress was significantly related to RE, RABBM, and CBWFR. Breaking their sample into client versus non-client categories, they found that clients had significantly higher levels of RE and RABBM.
Two recent studies provide further support for the hypothesis that depression and gender role conflict are related (Good, Robertson, et al., 1996; Shepard, 1994 a,b). College students’ RE and CBWFR significantly predicted depression (Good, Robertson et al., 1996) and Shepard (1994 a,b) found that all four of the patterns of gender role conflict were significantly related to depression. Isolating a depressed subsample, Shepard found that increased levels of gender role conflict were associated with greater pessimism and negativity toward self including self-dislike and self-accusations.
Men’s Interpersonal Behavior and Gender Role Conflict
Six studies shed light on men’s gender role conflict and interpersonal functioning (Berko, 1994; Brush, Berko, Haase, 1996; Fisher & Good, 1995, Mahalik, 1996; Sileo, 1995). Using Kiesler’s interpersonal circle, Mahalik (1996) found college men’s gender role conflict significantly correlated with more extreme interpersonal behavior. RE was related to hostile-submissive behavior, mistrust, and being cold, detached, and inhibited. RABBM was related to being both hostile dominant and hostile submissive including such characteristics as mistrust, being cold, detached, inhibited, and submissive. CBWFR related to being submissive, friendly, and hostile. Finally, SPC was related to dominance and hostility.
In the first study assessing adult men’s friendships, Sileo (1995, 1996) provides evidence on how intimacy and close relationships may be related to gender role conflict. Negative correlations were found between adult men’s intimacy and close relationships and three patterns of gender role conflict. Intimacy and close relationships were negative correlated with SPC, RE, RABBM, and the total gender role conflict score. RE had the strongest negative correlations with intimacy and close male relationships. Higher scores on restrictive emotionality related to lower levels of intimacy and close relationships and lower scores of restrictive emotionality related to greater intimacy and closeness between men. These data are supportive of Fischer and Good’s (1995) study that found RE significantly predicted fear of intimacy
Men’s gender role conflict and shyness have been researched in two separate studies (Berko, 1994; Bruch, Berko, & Haase, 1996). These researchers found that shyness and related personality attributes were directly associated with men’s gender role conflict. RE mediated shyness and instrumentality in predicting self disclosure. Using latent variable research, RE was found to mediate fears about negative evaluations as it relates to shyness.
Mahalik and Cournoyer (1997) have assessed men’s gender role conflict and defense mechanisms. Initial data indicates that immature defense mechanism (projection, denial, isolation) are related to gender role conflict. Furthermore, they found that SPC and RE are related to defenses that are turned against others.
Diversity, Special Groups, and Men’s Gender Role Conflict
Six studies have assessed special groups of men exploring diversity issues and gender role conflict. Thompson (1995 a, b) found that clients who had experienced sexual abuse reported significantly greater RE and CBWFR than did nonabused clients. She also found a relationship between gender role conflicted clients and 1) experiencing sex guilt, 2) having views of the world as malevolent and threatening, 3) having diminished capacity to establish, develop, and maintain relationships based on mutual love, respect, and concern for others.
Gullickson (1993) found that incarcerated sex offenders scored higher on gender role conflict patterns of RE and lower on SPC than non sex offenders. He also found that sex offenders with greater RE, RABBM, and CBWFR also reported significantly less warm, loving and attentive parents. Using a sample of dual career couple husbands, Mintz and Mahalik (1996) found that traditional husbands reported significantly more SPC than role sharing and participant husbands.
Three studies have looked at minority men’s gender role conflict. Wade (1996a) found that different stages of racial identity of African American men were differentially predictive of the patterns of gender role conflict. Men in externally defined racial identity stage, reported one or more patterns of gender role conflict. African American men, having an internally defined racial identity reported no patterns of gender role conflict.
Fragoso (1996) assessed Mexican American men, Mexican immigrant men, and Anglo men. For Anglo men, he found that machismo qualities correlated with total gender role conflict, SPC, RE, RABBM. Depression correlated with overall gender role conflict, SPC, RE, CBWFR. For the Mexican sample, global gender role conflict, SPC, and RE predicted stress whereas RE predicted depression. Machismo, as operationalized in this study, was found not to correlate with gender role conflict. The Mexican sample showed that: 1) acculturation, machismo, and gender role conflict predicted stress, 2) as the level of machismo increases so does the gender role conflict, 3) higher levels of machismo and gender role conflict were associated with increasing levels of stress and depression.
Torres Rivera (1995) assessed Puerto Rican men’s gender role conflict and ethnic identity. He found that gender role conflict was unrelated to ethnic identity. Furthermore, using confirmatory factor analysis, he found some construct validity for using the scale with poor Puerto Rican men, but clearly more research is needed.
Wade (1996b) completed an innovative study assessing how men’s reference group identity or lack of reference group relates to gender role conflict. Reference group identity was defined as the extent to which males are dependent on a reference group for their gender role self concepts. He found that having no reference group was positively related to RE and CBWFR, but negatively correlated with SPC. Reference group dependent men were significantly related to SPC, RE, RABBM, and total gender role conflict scores. Reference group non dependent men were significantly related to RE, RABBM, and total gender role conflict scores.
Addelston (1995a, 1995b) studied high school boy’s gender role conflict in both a single sex and coeducational setting. She found no differences in gender role conflict between boys in the two different settings. She did find some predictors relevant to gender role conflict. Boys who had a more fixed sense of reality, lower self esteem, and more traditional attitudes toward women had higher gender role conflict. Boys who had a more relativistic sense of reality, less gender role conflict, and more positive regard for one’s school had more egalitarian attitudes toward women.
Sexual Harassment, Assaults Against Women, and Gender Role Conflict
Four studies have assessed the relationship between men’s gender role conflict and sexual harassment or sexual assault against women (Floyd, Van Dillen & Kilmartin, 1994; Jacobs, 1995; Rando, Brittan, Pannu 1994; Rando, McBee, Brittan, Olsen-Rando, Winsted, 1995). Jacobs (1995), using an adult sample of men, found that gender role conflict was significantly related to attitudes toward sexual harassment. Men who reported SPC issues had more tolerant or accepting attitudes about sexual harassment. Three studies have assessed gender role conflict’s relationship to men’s attitudes and relationship toward women, rape myth acceptance, and self reported sexual aggression against women (Floyd, Van Dillen, & Kilmartin, 1994; Rando, Brittan, & Pannu, 1994; Rando, McBee, Brittan, Olsen-Rando, Winsted, 1995). Three patterns of gender role conflict (SPC, RE, RABBM) were significantly related to hostility toward women, rape myth acceptance, stereotypic views of women, feelings of inadequacy, being demeaned or belittled by a woman (Rando et al., 1994) Furthermore, these researchers found that self-reported, sexually aggressive men reported significantly more overall gender role conflict, (specifically, RE and RABBM), than non sexually aggressive men. Contrary to their earlier work, Rando et al., (1995) found that gender role conflict did not differentiate self reported sexual aggressors from non aggressors. They did find that gender role conflict was significantly related rape myth acceptance, traditional stereotyping of women, negative motivations for sexual acts. Finally, Floyd et al., (1994) found no differences between self reported male assaulters of women and non- assaulters across the four patterns of gender role conflict.
Therapist Gender Role Conflict and Changing Gender Role Conflict
The assessment of therapist’s gender role conflict was assessed through an experimental study by Wisch and Mahalik (1996). They found that male psychotherapists with high RABBM made negative clinical judgments when evaluating an angry male homosexual client. This research adds to one other experimental study that suggests that gender role conflicted clinicians may hold stereotypic and homophobic views of men (Hayes, 1985).
Using an experimental design, two interventions were developed to see if gender role conflicts could be changed through structured educational program (Brooks-Harris, Heesacker, & Mejia-Millan, 1996). The patterns of gender role conflict were not significantly changed, but the educational programs were able to change certain attitudes toward men’s roles.
THREE STUDIES ARE REVIEWED HERE THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Jim Mahalik and his students at Boston College completed three studies that were not included in the original SPSMM manuscript and we wanted to briefly review them here. Cournoyer and Mahalik (1995) compared college age men with middle aged men. They found that compared with college-aged men, middle aged men were less conflicted about success, power, and competition, but were more conflicted between work and family responsibilities. They also found significant relationships between gender role conflict and psychological well-being. In a second study, Wisch, Mahalik, Hayes, & Nutt, (1995) hypothesized that men’s gender role conflict would predict attitudes towards psychological help-seeking after viewing counseling that focused on either client feelings or client cognitions. Their results indicated that men scoring high on gender role conflict who viewed the session that focused on feelings were least likely to indicate a willingness to seek psychological help compared to men in each of the other three conditions. In a third study, Mintz and Mahalik (1996) examined men’s gender role factors ( gender role orientation and gender role conflict) as they contribute to the formation of either traditional, participant, or rolesharing family roles in men. The results indicated that traditional husbands reported greater pressure to be successful, powerful, and competitive compared to rolesharing and participant husbands.
Gender Role Conflict Research Program: Summary
The research reported provides more support for Jim Harrison’s (1978) article title: Warning: The male sex role may be dangerous to your health. These studies provide more evidence that gender role conflict indeed has negative consequences for men. The psychological issues associated with gender role conflict have been expanded to new areas including anger, alcohol use, alexithymia, psychological distress including areas of paranoia, psychoticism, and obsessive-compulsivity. The relationship of men’s intimacy, depression, and helping seeking behavior to different patterns of gender role conflict adds to earlier studies (O’Neil et al., 1995) suggesting their possible importance to providers of psychotherapy and psychoeducational programs. Three of studies used therapy clients and one study focused on male therapist’s assessments of men. These studies move us closer to understanding how gender role conflict may become a therapeutic issue during the counseling process. The research relating men’s gender role conflict to interpersonal behavior such as shyness, men’s friendships and defense mechanisms, and extreme interpersonal behavior begins to address more specific issues of men. As opposed to the earlier studies (O’Neil et al., 1995), six of the studies used adult samples. Furthermore, the diversity of the samples used with these studies included sex abuse victims, sexual abusers, military men, African-American, Mexican-American, and Puerto Rican men, and highschool men. This kind of broader sampling allows gender role conflict to be better understood beyond the usual college student samples.
There are numerous limitations to the research reviewed here and we have addressed some of the more critical issues elsewhere (Good et al., 1995; O’Neil et al., 1995). There is a need for further psychometric work on the Gender Role Conflict Scale before we can fully understand men’s gender role conflict.
Basic research is a good thing in itself, but it is even better when it guides clinical practice, community programming, and public policy. We feel that the research on gender role conflict is beginning to address more salient issues for men and women. Our hope is that the next review of studies will focus even more on gender role conflict as it relates to men’s pain across different races, classes, ethnic backgrounds, and sexual orientations. Furthermore, research needs to focus on the therapy process with gender conflicted men and assessing innovative and preventive psychoeducational interventions that transform men’s lives. We invite each of you in SPSMM to join in this important research endeavor as we begin to develop an empirical base in the new psychology of men.
Addelston, J. (1995a). Gender role conflict in elite independent high schools. (Doctoral dissertation, SUNY Graduate School). New York City, New York.
Addelston, J. (August, 1995b). Gender role conflict in elite independent high schools. In J. O’Neil & G. Good (Chairs), Men’s Gender role conflict: Empirical studies advancing the psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, New York, New York.
Berko, E.H. (1994). Shyness, gender-role orientation, physical self-esteem, and gender role conflict. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Albany, State University of New York). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55/90, 4100.
Blazina, C. Watkins, C.E. (1996). Masculine gender role conflict: Effects on college men’s psychological well-being, chemical substance usage, and attitudes toward help-seeking. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 461-465.
Brooks-Harris, J.E., Heesacker, M., & Mejia-Millan, C. (1996). Changing men’s male gender role attitudes by applying the elaboration likelihood model of attitude change. Sex Roles, 35, 563-580.
Bruch, M.A., Berko, E.H. & Haase, R.F. (1997). Shyness and male gender- role conflict: Evidence of direct and mediated relations with dysfunction in interpersonal responses. State University of New York – Albany, Albany, New York. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Cournoyer, R.J. & Mahalik, J.R. (1995). Cross sectional study of gender role conflict examining college-aged men middle-aged men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 11-19.
Fischer, A.R. & Good, G.E. (August, 1995). Masculine gender roles, recognition of emotions, and interpersonal intimacy. In J. O’Neil & G. Good (Chairs), Empirical studies advancing the psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, New York, New York.
Floyd, K.D., Van Dillen, A.B. & Kilmartin, C.T. (1994). Gender role characteristics and parental relationships of sexual assault perpetrators. Unpublished manuscript, Mary Washington College, Fredericksburg, VA.
Fragoso, J.M. (August, 1996). Mexican machismo, gender role conflict, acculturation, and mental health. In J.M. O’Neil and G.E. (Chairs), Men gender role conflict research advancing the new psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Garnets, L. & Pleck, J. (1979). Sex role identity, androgyny, and sex role transcendence: A sex role strain analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3, 270-283.
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.
Good, G.E., Robertson, J.M., Fitzgerald, L. F., Stevens, M.A., Bartles, K.M. (1996). The relations between masculine role conflict and psychological distress in male university counseling center clients. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 44-49.
Gullickson, G.E. (1993). Gender role conflict in sex offenders. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55/05, 2008.
Harrison, J. (1978). Warning: the male sex role may be dangerous to your health. Journal of Social Issues, 34, 65-86.
Hayes, M. M. (1985). Counselor sex-role values and effects on attitudes toward, and treatment of non-traditional male clients. (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 45/09, 3072.
Jacobs, J. (1996). Psychological and demographic correlates of men’s perception of and attitudes toward sexual harassment. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California). Dissertation Abstracts International 97/05, 117.
Levant, R. F. & Pollack, W. S. (1995). The new psychology of men. New York: Basic Books.
Mahalik, J.R., DeFranc, W., Cournoyer, R. & Cherry, M. ( August, 1997). Gender-role conflict: Predictors of men’s utilization of psychological defenses. To be presented In J. M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Gender role conflict research: Implications for the new psychology of men. Symposium to be presented at the American Psychological Association, Chicago, Ill, August, 1997.
Mahalik, J.R., (August, 1996). Gender role conflict in men as a predictor of behavior on the interpersonal circle. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Men gender role conflict research: New directions in counseling men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Mintz, R. & Mahalik, J.R. (1996). Gender role orientation and conflict as predictors of family roles for men. Sex Roles. 34, 805-821.
O’Neil, J.M. (1981b). Patterns of gender role conflict and strain: Sexism and fear of femininity in men’s lives. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60, 203-210.
O’Neil, J.M. (1981b). Male sex-role conflicts, sexism, and masculinity: Implications for men, women, and the counseling psychologist. The Counseling Psychologist, 9, 61-80.
O’Neil, J.M. (1982). Gender role conflict and strain in men’s lives: Implications for psychiatrists, psychologists, and other human service providers. In K. Solomon & N.B. Levy (Eds.), Men in transition: Changing males roles, theory, and therapy. New York: Plenum Publishing Co.
O’Neil, J.M. (1990). Assessing men’s gender role conflict. In D. Moore & F. Leafgren (Eds.) Men in conflict: Problems solving strategies and interventions. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
O’Neil, J.M. (1997). Bibliography on gender role conflict and the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS). School of Family Studies, U Box 58, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269. (Bibliography available by writing to the above address. Complete information on the Gender Role Conflict Research Program will be on line in my home page after July 1, 1997. My E Mail Address is: firstname.lastname@example.org
O’Neil, J.M., Fishman, D.M. & Kinsella-Shaw, M. (1987). Dual-career couples’ career transitions and normative dilemmas: A preliminary assessment model. The Counseling Psychologist, 15, (1), 50-96.
O’Neil, J.M., Good, G.E., Holmes, S. (1995). Fifteen years of theory and research on men’s gender role conflict: New paradigms for empirical research. In R. Levant & W. Pollack (Eds.) The new psychology of men. New York: Basic Books.
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, 5/6, 335-350.
O’Neil, J.M., Skovholt, T.M., Scher, M., Birk, J., Hanson, G., & Collison, B., (September, 1980). Sex role conflicts, sexism, masculinity: Psychological implications for counseling psychologists. J.M. O’Neil (Chair), Symposium presented at the American Psychological Association, Montreal, Canada.
Pleck, J. (1981). The myth of masculinity. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Rando, R.A., Brittan, C.S., & Pannu, R.K. (August, 1994). Gender role conflict and college men’s sexually aggressive attitudes and behavior. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Research on men’s sexual and psychological assault of women: Programming considerations. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
Rando, R.A., Hill, H.E., & Olsen-Rando, D.R. (August, 1996). Parent-child relationship and college men’s gender role conflict. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Men’s gender-role conflict research advancing the new psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Rando, R. A., McBee, S.M., & Brittan, C.S. (August, 1995). Gender role conflict and college men’s sexually aggressive attitudes and behavior – II. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Empirical studies advancing the psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, New York, New York.
Shepard, D.S. (1994a). Male gender role conflict and expression of depression. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California, Department of Counseling Psychology). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55/06, 1477.
Shepard, D.S. (1994b). Male gender role conflict and expression of depression. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
Sileo, F.J. (1995). Gender role conflict: Intimacy and closeness in male-male friendships. (Doctoral Dissertation, Fordham University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 95/43,62.
Sileo, F.J. (August, 1996). Gender-role conflict: Intimacy and closeness in male-male friendships. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Men’s gender role conflict research: New directions in counseling men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Thomson, p. (1995a). Men’s sexual abuse: Object relations, gender role conflict, and guilt. (Doctoral dissertation, Adelphi University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56/06, 3467.
Thomson, P. (August, 1995b). Men’s sexual abuse: Object relations, gender role conflict, and guilt. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Empirical studies advancing the psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, New York, New York.
Torres Rivera, E. (1995). Puerto Rican men, gender role conflict, and ethnic identity. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56/10, 4159.
Van Delft, C. & Birk, J.M. (August, 1996). Military men’s gender role conflict, occupational satisfaction, and psychological distress. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Men’s gender role conflict research advancing the new psychology of men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Wade, J.C. (1996a). African American men’s gender role conflict: The significance of racial identity. Sex Roles, 34, 458-464.
Wade, J.C. (August, 1996b) Reference group identity dependence: A gender role conflict explanatory construct. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Men’s gender role conflict research: New directions in counseling men. Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.
Wisch, A.F. & Mahalik, J.M. (August, 1996). Male counselor gender role conflict and clinical judgment. In J.M. O’Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs) Men’s gender role conflict research: New directions in counseling men, Symposium conducted at the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada. 20 21.
Wisch, A.F., Mahalik, J.R., Hayes, J.A., & Nutt, E.A. (1995). The impact of gender role conflict and counseling techniques on psychological help seeking in men. Sex Roles, 33, 77-89.