When less is more: Psychometric properties of Norwegian short-forms of the Ambivalent Sexism Scales ( ASI and AMI) and the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance ( IRMA) Scale.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: When less is more: Psychometric properties of Norwegian short-forms of the Ambivalent Sexism Scales ( ASI and AMI) and the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance ( IRMA) Scale.
Authors: Bendixen, Mons, Kennair, Leif Edward Ottesen
Source: Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. Dec2017, Vol. 58 Issue 6, p541-550. 10p. 5 Charts, 2 Graphs.
Subjects: Rape & psychology, College students, Experimental design, High school students, Research methodology, Psychometrics, Research evaluation, Sex discrimination, Sexism, Stereotypes, Student attitudes, Adolescence
Abstract: This paper reports on the development and the psychometric properties of short forms of Ambivalent Sexism Scales toward women (ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996) and men (AMI; Glick & Fiske, 1999), and a scale measuring rape stereotypes (IRMA; McMahon & Farmer, 2011). The short form AMI/ASI were applied for examining gender and educational differences in university students (N = 512) and in high school students (N = 1381), and for predicting individual differences in rape stereotypes in the latter. The short forms demonstrated good to excellent psychometric properties across samples of emerging adults. Relative to female students, male students reported markedly more hostility toward women and more stereotypical beliefs about rape. Despite sampling from a highly gender egalitarian and secular culture, these gender differences are on a par with those reported internationally. Rape stereotypes were predicted by sexism in high school students. Additional predictors were educational program, relationship status, and acceptance of derogatory sexual slurs. The paper questions the validity of separate constructs for benevolent sexism toward women versus men. The short form versions of the scales may substitute the original versions in future research, and help prevent attrition while measuring the same constructs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Scandinavian Journal of Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:This paper reports on the development and the psychometric properties of short forms of Ambivalent Sexism Scales toward women (ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996) and men (AMI; Glick & Fiske, 1999), and a scale measuring rape stereotypes (IRMA; McMahon & Farmer, 2011). The short form AMI/ASI were applied for examining gender and educational differences in university students (N = 512) and in high school students (N = 1381), and for predicting individual differences in rape stereotypes in the latter. The short forms demonstrated good to excellent psychometric properties across samples of emerging adults. Relative to female students, male students reported markedly more hostility toward women and more stereotypical beliefs about rape. Despite sampling from a highly gender egalitarian and secular culture, these gender differences are on a par with those reported internationally. Rape stereotypes were predicted by sexism in high school students. Additional predictors were educational program, relationship status, and acceptance of derogatory sexual slurs. The paper questions the validity of separate constructs for benevolent sexism toward women versus men. The short form versions of the scales may substitute the original versions in future research, and help prevent attrition while measuring the same constructs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:00365564
DOI:10.1111/sjop.12392