expressiveness does predict well-being

Sex Roles, Vol. 29, Nos. 3/4, 1993

Expressiveness Does

M e l i s s a G. Hunt 2 University of Pennsylvania

Predict Well-Being 1

Previous studies of "sex role" and well-being have yielded mixed results on the relationship between expressive traits and well-being. This may be due to methodological inconsistencies, problems inherent in early sex role inventories, and narrow definitions of well-being. This study assessed the relationship between the instrumental and expressive traits on the Short Bem Sex Role Inventory (SBSRI) and a composite picture of well-being including depression, positive affect, affect balance, life satisfaction, and affect intensity, in a sample of primarily white middle-class college students. The two scales of the SBSRI predicted most aspects of well-being equally well, yielding two independent main effects. The expressfi, e scale was the only significant predictor of affect intensity. Expressiveness scores were positively correlated with affect intensity overall, and with positive affect intensity in particular. It is suggested that the SBSRI is tapping two factors of a general positive self-schema, rather than sex role per se.

Since 1974, when Bem (1974, 1977, 1979) and Spence, Helmreich, and Stapp (1974, 1975)introduced the first "sex role" inventories, research on sex role and well-being has burgeoned. While some researchers have found that "androgyny," i.e., equal, high levels of "masculinity" and "femininity," is most closely associated with well-being (e.g., Bern, 1975), others maintain that the "masculine" traits alone are associated with well-being (e.g., Pyke, 1985). More recently, the discussion has been recast in terms of instrumental and expressive traits, rather than global sex role (Spence & Helmreich, 1980; Spence, 1991), but the debate regarding well-being remains essen-

1Funds for this study were provided by the University of Pennsylvania Psychology Department. Many thanks to Martin Seligman and Janet Spence for their helpful comments on several drafts. Thanks also to Jay Hull and George Wolford for their help with statistical queries.

2To whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, 3815 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104.

147

03604)025/93/0800--0147507.00/0 © 1993 Plenum Publishing Corporation

148 Hunt

tially the same. Is it only the instrumental traits (such as "independent" and "assertive") that contribute to well-being, or do the expressive traits (such as "nurturant" and "sympathetic") also play a role?

Part of the problem may be that well-being itself has many different components, including: (1) the absence of negative affect or pathology (Mugford & Lally, 1981), (2) the balance of negative and positive affect (Bradburn, 1969; Zevon & Tellegen, 1982; Warr, Barter, & Brownbridge, 1983; Diener, 1984), (3) life satisfaction (Andrews & Withey, 1976; Camp- bell, 1981; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffen, 1985), and (4) affect intensity (Diener, Larsen, Levine, & Emmons, 1985; Larsen & Diener, 1987).

Diener (1984) reviewed 18 studies on the measurement of subjective well-being. He concluded that welt-being should be understood as a composite of negative affect, positive affect, affect intensity and global life satisfaction. Life satisfaction here refers to a cognitive judgment of an individual's quality of life that is relatively independent of current affect (Diener, Emmons et al., 1985). Ryff (1989) also emphasized the composite nature of well-being.

Few studies of the instrumental and expressive traits and well-being have measured well-being in multiple ways. Indeed, much of the debate about the relative contribution of the two sets of traits can be resolved by examining the dependent measures employed in the various studies. Many have focused exclusively on the lack of depressive symptomatology (e.g., Elpern & Karp, 1984; Tinsley, Sullivan-Guest, & McGuire, 1984; Pidano & Tennen, 1985; Stoppard & Paisley, 1987). Other studies have examined self-esteem (e.g., Antill & Cunningham, 1979; Payne & Futterman, 1983; Feather, 1985; Whitley, 1983, 1988) or positive affect (Lubinsky, Tellegen, & Butcher, 1981). One study looked at how frequently an individual would express love and happiness as well as sadness and hate (Ganong & Cole- man, 1984).

Other studies have examined behavioral correlates of these traits. Baucom and his colleagues (Baucom & Danker-Brown, 1979, 1984; Bau- com, 1983; Baucom & Weiss, 1986) looked at the acquisition of learned helplessness (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978) in leadership tasks. They extrapolated from these results to draw conclusions about vulnerabil- ity to depression. Bern and her colleagues (Bern, 1975; Bem, Martyna, & Watson, 1976); examined willingness to engage in affiliative behaviors such as cuddling babies. They hypothesized that such behavioral correlates of the scale would be related to social competence in a wide variety of settings and, in turn, to well-being.

Reviewers of this literature have been unable to reach a consensus on the importance of the expressive traits. Taylor and Hall (1982) tenta- tively concluded that the instrumental traits were more important, since

Expressiveness 149

most studies find a strong relationship between the instrumental traits and well-being while the effects of expressiveness vary across studies. Whitley (1985) in a meta-analysis of 32 studies, found that while only the instrumental traits predicted low depression, the expressive traits were clearly related to general adjustment, including measures of positive affect and physical health. Pyke (1985) concluded that the well-being effects of androgyny were probably due entirely to the instrumental traits. She suggested that any psychological advantage found in androgyny was probably due to the selection of dependent measures, such as willingness to cuddle babies, that favored the display of the "feminine" or expressive scale items, such as "love children." Ironically, Pyke did not suggest that the psychological advantage found in the masculine or instrumental traits might be due to the selection of dependent measures, such as ability to regain control in group settings (Baucom, 1983), that favored the display of masculine or instrumental scale items such as "have leadership abilities."

Thus it appears that the inconsistent results regarding the expressive scale may be the result of artifact. Studies that focus only on the lack of depressive symptomatology yield different results than studies that examine a broader picture of well-being. While it is legitimate for researchers to focus only on depression, they should not make more general claims about well-being. Moreover, the use of dependent measures that are clearly related to one scale or the other have yielded one-sided results. While it is interesting that the instrumental traits predict leadership, this does not tell us much about the role of the expressive traits in predicting well-being. What is needed is a set of dependent measures based on theoretical and empirical work on the composite nature of well-being.

In addition to varying dependent measures, the sex role measures themselves have changed over the years. The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) in particular has been revised substantially. Numerous studies have focused on the content and factor structure of the long BSRI (e.g., Gaudreau, 1977; Whetton & Swindels, 1977; Gaa, Liberman, & Erdwins, 1979; Pedhazur & Tetenbaum, 1979; Thompson & Melancon, 1986; Thompson, 1989). In general these studies have found one factor that includes most of Bem's original masculine or instrumental traits, another that includes about half of the original feminine or expressive traits and a third that includes the terms "masculine" and "feminine." While there do seem to be two distinct factors reflecting instrumentality and expressiveness, about half of the original expressive items fail to load on either one.

Bem (1979) determined that the expressive items in question had lower social desirability than the instrumental items or the other expressive items. She revised the BSRI to correct for this inconsistency. The Short Bern Sex Role Inventory, or SBSRI, eliminates the low desirability items,

150 Hunt

and the terms "masculine" and "feminine," and shortens the scale overall, thereby equating the desirability of all the traits. (The items that were eliminated include yielding, shy, fiatterable, gullible, and child-like). Studies of well-being that employed the long version found a weaker relationship between the expressive traits and well-being than studies that employed the more internally consistent short inventory.

For example, Elpern and Karp (1984) used the long BSRI and found no main effect for the expressive traits on depression. They did find an interaction effect, however, such that the expressive traits were positively correlated with depression in women with low instrumental traits. Antill and Cunningham (1979) used the long BSRI and found that the expressive traits were not significantly related to self-esteem at all. In contrast, Lu- binsky et al. (1981) used the short version of the BSRI and found that the expressive scale was positively correlated with positive affect. Finally, Payne and Futterman (1983) used both the long and the short versions of the BSRI. Overall, the expressive scale on the long form showed no relationship to either depression or anxiety. The short-form scale, however, was significantly negatively correlated with both. Moreover, they found that six items from the original scale (those most criticized for low social desirability) were actually positively correlated with depression and anxiety.

Frable and Bem (1985) commented in a footnote that the short BSRI classifies a smaller percentage of subjects as "sex typed" (that is, above the sample median on the sex-congruent scale and below on the sex-incongru- ent scale) than the long version. (Since the long version is less internally consistent, one would expect more individuals to score differently on the two scales.) Frable and Bem failed to get any statistically significant results in their investigation of "gender-schematic" information processing using the shortened version of the BSRI. On the basis of this they recommended that the long form be used in any future research. This recommendation seems to be at odds with both factor analytic interpretations of the BSRI and with Bem's own initial construction criteria, which called for the equal desirability of the two scales. Indeed, one might question the degree to which their results depend on whether individuals are or are not willing to endorse undesirable items or specifically gender-related items such as "feminine," as opposed to whether they are more or less expressive or instrumental (Spence, 1993). Recall that some of the anomalous results in the well-being literature can be traced to early use of the full scale. For all these reasons, the short version of the BSRI was used in this study.

The current study was designed to examine the relationship between the socially desirable instrumental and expressive traits and a composite picture of well-being that includes both negative and positive affect, in addition to life satisfaction and affect intensity. Consistent with earlier findings,

Expressiveness 151

I expected to find that high instrumentality scores would be associated with the absence of negative affect and high life satisfaction. Due to the use of the short form of the BSRI and the inclusion of positive affect and affect intensity among the dependent measures I expected to find a strong effect for the expressive scale as well. That is, I predicted that high expressiveness scores would be associated with the absence of negative affect and the presence of positive affect. Since both androgynous and feminine individuals are more likely to express the emotions of love, happiness, and sadness (Ganong & Coleman, 1984), I predicted that high expressiveness scores would be positively correlated with high affect intensity. Moreover, since rumination is likely to intensify affect (Larsen, Diener, & Cropanzano, 1987) and expressive individuals are more likely to ruminate (Conway, Giannopoulos, & Stiefenhofer, 1990) this also suggested that expressive individuals would have higher affect intensity. In sum, I expected to find that individuals who describe themselves as high in both instrumentality and expressiveness would enjoy the greatest well-being overall, because each scale would make an independent contribution to explaining the variance in well-being.

M E T H O D

Subjects

The subjects were 72 male and 87 female undergraduates from the University of Pennsylvania. Students were approached in classes and out- doors and were offered $5 or the chance to participate in a lottery with three prizes of $150, $100, and $50 in return for filling out the questionnaires. One of the measures used, the Affect Intensity Measure, was not obtained until shortly after data collection had started. Results involving this variable are therefore given for only 57 male and 72 female subjects. Mean age of the subjects was 20.3 years. Subjects were mostly white and middle class, but no specific information was collected as to race, ethnic origin, or social class.

Measures

Measures included a brief identifying data questionnaire, a number of instruments designed to measure different aspects of well-being and the SBSRI. Consistent with recent conceptions of well-being as a composite of

152 Hunt

positive and negative affect, life satisfaction, and affect intensity, I used a battery of validated questionnaires in an attempt to measure each element.

I used the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, Beck et al., 1961) to measure degree of depressive symptomatology. While the BDI certainly does not encompass the entire range of negative affect, it is a convenient summary measure that has been used in hundreds of studies, including many studies of sex role and well-being. The BDI is 21-item questionnaire with items covering the major components of depression including self-esteem, and affective, cognitive, vegetative, and libidinal symptoms. Each symptom is rated on a scale of 0-3. Examples of items rated at a score of 1 are as follows: I am disappointed in myself; I feel sad: I put off making decisions more than I used to; I get tired more easily than I used to; I am less interested in other people than I used to be. A recent meta-analysis of the BDI found an internal consistency estimate of 0.81 for nonpsychiatric populations (Beck, Steer, & Garbin, 1988).

To measure positive affect, I used the well-being subscale of the Dif- ferential Personality Questionnaire (DPQ; Lubinsky, Tellegen, & Butcher, 1981; Tellegen, 1982), which captures optimism about the future, height- ened levels of self-esteem, interest, energy, excitement, and satisfaction. Note that positive affect is seen here as the opposite of depression, not merely its absence. The DPQ is a 24-item, true/false questionnaire covering a range of positive affect and satisfaction. Questions span a range from feeling contented and peaceful to feeling actively engaged, optimistic and excited about life. Sample items include the following: Most of the time I feel at peace with the world; I am just naturally cheerful; Most days I have moments of real fun or joy; I find it very easy to enjoy lie; For me life is a great adventure. Internal consistency for the scale is reported as 0.89 (Tellegen & Waller, in preparation).

I used the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale (BABS; Bradburn, 1969) to determine the relative balance of positive and negative affect. The BABS is a 14-item questionnaire that asks people to rate how often they have felt a particular feeling in the past week on a scale of 0 (never) to 3 (often). Item are balanced for positive and negative affect. Sample positive affect items include the following: On top of the world; Particularly excited or interested in something; That things were going your way. Negative items cover both depression and anxiety. Samples are as follows: Very lonely or remote from other people; Angry at something that usually wouldn't bother you; Bored; Vaguely uneasy about something without knowing why. Inter- nal consistency estimates on this scale range from 0.60 to 0.73 (Stacey & Gatz, 1991).

I used the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons et al., 1985) to measure each subject's overall assessment of his or her life

Expressiveness 153

situation. The SWLS is comprised of 5 items that are rated 1 (strongly dis- agree) to 7 (strongly agree). Samples are as follows: In most ways my life is close to my ideal; The conditions of my life are excellent; I am satisfied with my life; So far I have gotten the important things I want in life; If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing. Note that none of these items reflect current mood. Internal consistency for this scale is reported at 0.87 (Diener, Emmons et al., 1985).

Finally, I measured affect intensity using Larsen's Affect Intensity Measure (AIM; Larsen & Diener, 1987). The AIM is a 40-item questionnaire counterbalanced for positive and negative affect intensity. Subjects rate how often they experience a certain type of emotion on a 6-point scale with 1 being Never and 6 being Always. Some items are reverse keyed. Negative affect items cover anxiety, anger, guilt, and sadness. Sample negative items include the following: When I am nervous I get shaky all over; When I get angry it's easy for me to still be rational and not overreact; When I do something wrong, I have strong feelings of shame and guilt; Sad movies deeply touch me. Positive affect items cover contentment, joy, and pride. Sample items include the following: When I am happy the feeling is more like contentment and inner calm than one of exhilaration and excitement; When I'm happy I bubble over with energy; When I accomplish something difficult I feel delighted or elated. Internal consistency for this scale is reported as ranging from 0.90 to 0.94 (Larsen & Diener, 1987).

Larsen and Diener (1987) maintain that overall affect intensity is a stable personality trait and they use the AIM to obtain a single summary score. Diener and Emmons (1985), however, conclude that positive and negative affect are independent over long time courses. Moreover, Diener, Colvin, Pavot, and Allman (1991) used the AIM to obtain separate positive and negative affect intensity scores. While the two constructs are closely related (in this sample, positive and negative affect intensity were correlated at r = .43, p < .001), they are not identical. Therefore, results are reported for all three possible scores.

I measured sex role using the SBSRI (Bern 1974, 1979). The Instru- mental Scale on the SBSRI consists of the following traits: Defend my own beliefs; Independent; Assertive; Strong personality; Forceful; Have leadership abilities; Willing to take risks; Dominant; Willing to take a stand; Ag- gressive. The Expressive Scale consists of the following: Affectionate; Sympathetic; Sensitive to needs of others; Understanding; Compassionate; Eager to soothe hurt feelings; Warm; Tender; Love children; Gentle.

A further source of inconsistency in studies of sex role and well-being is the great variety of scoring procedures that have been employed to determine sex role. This scoring controversy has been long and heated and remains unresolved at this writing (see especially Orlofsky, Aslin, &

154 Hunt

Ginsburg, 1977; Kelly, Furman, & Young, 1978; Downing, 1979; Spence & Helmreich, 1979; Lubinsky et al., 1981; Pyke, 1985). Historically, the "median-split" procedure (Spence et al., 1975; Spence & Helmreich, 1979; Ben, 1977, 1979) has been the most widely adopted. Median splits reduce variance, however, and are best understood as a weak test of moderator effects (Dunlap & Kemery, 1987). More recently, researchers have advocated the use of regression analyses using the mean score of each scale and including a cross-product interaction term (Lubinsky et al., 1981; Hall & Taylor, 1985). Indeed, both Bem (1977) and Spence et al. (1975) also strongly advocated the use of regression techniques. Therefore, regression is the pri- mary form of data analysis in this study. However, for the sake of comparability to older studies, the results are also analyzed and presented graphically using the median split scoring procedure.

Procedure

Subjects were tested singly and in small groups. Consent was obtained on a written form stating that the purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between certain cognitive and personality variables and depression. Subjects were simply handed the questionnaire packet and were requested to follow the instructions on each page. The SBSRI was always given first to ensure that the well-being questionnaires did not bias the subject's responses. Well-being questionnaires were then given in random order. Also included in the packet were two questionnaires (not relevant to this study) that addressed the way the subject responds to positive and negative affect. When the subject completed the packet the experimenter thanked them and orally debriefed them as to the hypotheses of the study.

RESULTS

Summary

Overall, the results supported the hypothesis that the expressive traits would predict well-being just as well as the instrumental traits. The instrumental and expressive scales of the SBSRI were both negatively correlated with depression and positively correlated with positive affect, affect balance, and life satisfaction. Multiple regression yielded two independent main effects with instrumentality and expressiveness accounting for the variance in these components of well-being equally. Affect intensity, however, was significantly correlated only with the expressive scale. There were no sex

Expressiveness 155

differences in the well-being measures. One marginally significant sex difference was found in the instrumentality and expressiveness scores. There were no interaction effects between sex, instrumentality, expressiveness, and the dependent measures. (Cases of missing data were simply eliminated from each individual analysis. There were seven outliers in the sample, all of whom scored 19 or higher on the BDI. Only one of these had high leverage. Since scatterplots revealed no significant nonlinearity, outliers were included in the analysis.)

Well-Being

First, the means for the instrumental and expressive scales were calculated for each subject, and a Pearson correlation matrix was calculated for the two scales and the well-being measures. (Bonferroni probabilities were used in all cases to adjust for multiple significance tests; see Table I.)

Both the instrumental and expressive scales are moderately but significantly correlated with all the measures of well-being in the expected directions. It is especially worthy of note that the expressive scale is nega-

Table I. Pearson Correlations of Instrumental and Expressive Scale Scores and Well-Being Measures, with Bonferroni

Adjusted Probabilities a

Measure Instrumental Expressive

Depression - 0 . 2 7 5 c - 0 . 2 9 c

Positive 0.386 d 0 .354 d A f f e c t

A f f e c t 0 .338 d 0.261 ̀ / Balance

Life 0 .366 d 0 .255 d Satisfaction

aDepression: Beck Depress ion Inventory; Positive Affect: Differential Personality Questionnaire; Affect Balance: Bradburn A f f e c t Balance Scale; Life Satisfaction: Satisfaction with Life Scale. For the BDI, higher scores equal greater depression. For the DPQ and the SWLS higher scores indicate greater positive affect and life satisfaction. For the BABS, positive scores indicate relatively more positive than negative affect. The higher the score, the greater the balance favors positive affect. bp < .05.

~ < .01. < .001.

156 Hunt

tively correlated with depression to the same degree that the instrumental scale is.

Next, each of the well-being measures was regressed on instrumentality, expressiveness, and their cross-product interaction term. Note that independent variables must be standardized in order to reduce the problem of multicollinearity when cross products are included. Such a linear trans- formation does not change the simple correlations (main effects) in any way. See Dunlap and Kemery (1987) for a discussion of this procedure. The interaction term failed to reach significance in every case so results will be reported only for the main effects. Consistent with predictions, strong main effects (all t > 3.5, p < .001) were found for both the instrumental and the expressive scales in all cases. Together, the two accounted for 16%-27% of the variance in well-being. (For depression, R 2 = .16. For positive affect, R 2 = .27. For affect balance, R 2 = .18. For life satisfaction, R 2 = .20.)

Stepwise regressions were then run to determine the percentage of the variance accounted for by each of the scales. The incremental changes in R 2 were nearly equal in the cases of depression and positive affect, with instrumentality and expressiveness showing equal predictive power. (For depression, instrumentality and expressiveness each accounted for 8% of the variance. For positive affect, instrumentality and expressiveness accounted for 15% and 12% of the variance respectively.) For affect balance and life satisfaction, the expressive traits had slightly less predictive power than the instrumental traits, but still accounted for a significant portion of the variance. (For affect balance, instrumentality and expressiveness accounted for 11% and 7% of the variance, for life satisfaction 13% and 7%, respectively.)

Thus in every case, there are two clear main effects that are additive, not interactive. That is, each of the two sets of traits accounts for some of the variance in well-being, regardless of the presence or absence of the other set of traits. In the cases of depression and positive affect, the effects are nearly equal. Since both contribute independently, individuals high in both sets of traits show greater well-being than individuals high in only one or neither of the traits. Note, however, that this does not represent an interaction effect (Downing, 1979).

To aid comparison to previous studies, these results were also analyzed using the median-split procedure to derive four groups. One group is above the sample median on both scales. Individuals in this group reported high levels of both expressiveness and instrumentality. This group corresponds to the old category of "androgynous". A second group is below the sample median on instrumentality, but above the median on expressiveness. This corresponds to the old "feminine" category. A third group

Expressiveness

Table II. Well-Being Means and Standard Deviations by Sex Rolea

157

Categorical sex role

Well-being A F M U measure (n = 43) (n = 42) (n = 41) (1l = 33)

Depression 4.07 m u 6.62u 7.15 a 9"64a,f (4.75) ' (7.10) (5.66) (5.42)

Positive 20.67f rn,u 15"91a u 15"85a u 12"33a f m Affect (3.85)' (6.40)' (5.29)' (6.55)' '

Affect 1-24f m u 0-61a u 0"58a u 0"05a,f,m Balance (0.69i' ' (0.98)' (1.03)' (1.35)

Life 5.47t, m, u 4"79a u 4"89a u 3"76a,f,m Satisfaction (1.08) (1.40)' (1.34)' (1.35)

Affect 3'90m u 3"87rn u 3'58a f 3"60a r Intensity (0.57) ' (0.50) ' (0.54)' (0.47)'

Possitive 4"10m u 3.90 3.73 a 3.63 a Affect (0.59) ' (0.54) (0.56) (0.72) Intensity

Negative 3.61 3.84 3.54 3.86 Affect (0.66) (0.55) (0.74) (0.95) Intensity

aNote: Subscript letters indicate significant differences from the indicated groups of at least p = .05. Standard deviations are in parentheses. A: androgynous; F: feminine; M: masculine; U: undifferentiated.

is above the median on instrumentality, but below the median on expressiveness. This corresponds to the old "masculine" category. The last group is below the median on both scales. Individuals in this group see themselves as being low in all of the traits. This corresponds to the old "undifferen- t iated" category. (See Table II.)

One-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs), which tested for a single main effect of sex role group on well-being, were run using these four groups. The ANOVAs for all four measures of well-being were significant at leas tp = .001 [all F(3,155) > 5.8]. Next, individual t tests were conducted to compare the means of each group on each measure. See Fig. 1 for a graphic representation of these results.

In the old terminology, the masculine and feminine groups are indis- tinguishable from each other (all t < .37, all p > .70). The androgynous group clearly enjoys the greatest positive affect, affect balance and satisfaction with life and suffers the least depression. (The androgynous group

158 Hunt

12

11

10

9 J. 6 1o

1.5

j O.5

-0.5

Depression by Sex Role PoalUve M t e e t by Sex Role

c

T o b bc

A F M U Sex Role

Af fec t Be.to.nee by Sex ]Pole

Sex Role

22

20

18

16 1 J,

12

10

8

5

J,

2

S t t i d t o ~ o n f l t h

b

I

F M U Sex Role

Life by Saz Role

b

A r M U Sex Role

Feminine

I-'-] Undlff~letl~

-I- = Standard er ror of the mean

Different letters indicate signf icant

di f ferences of at leost p= .05

Fig. 1. Well-being means by SBSRI category

was marginally less depressed than the feminine group at t = 1.951, p = .054). Again we see that the masculine or instrumental and feminine or expressive traits seem to contribute equally to well-being. This is strong support for the hypothesis that, once the methodological problems were adequately addressed, the expressive traits would be seen to predict well- being.

Expressiveness 159

Table III. Pearson Correlations of Instrumental and Expressive Scale Scores and Affect Intensity, with Bonferroni Adjusted

Probabilities a

Measure Instrumental Expressive

-0.015, ns 0.322 b Overall Affect Intensity

Positive 0.085, ns 0.315 b Affect Intensity

Negative Affect Intensity

-0.150, ns 0.085, ns

aOverall Affect Intensity: AIM; Positive Affect Intensity: Positive Affect Subscale of the AIM; Negative Affect Intensity: Negative Affect Subscale of the AIM. Affect Intensity scores are such that higher scores indicate greater intensity.

bp < .005.

Affect Intensity

As predicted, affect intensity was significantly related only to the expressive traits. (See Table III.)

It is noteworthy that whereas the expressive scale was positively correlated with positive affect intensity, the instrumental scale was not.

Next, affect intensity, positive affect intensity and negative affect intensity were regressed on the instrumental and expressive scale scores. In the case of affect intensity overall, and positive affect intensity in particular, only the expressive scale was a significant predictor (for the expressive scale, t > 3.7, p < .001, R 2 > .10 in both cases, for the instrumental scale, p > .05, R 2 < .01). Neither scale was a significant predictor of negative affect intensity, however, although the instrumental scale approached significance at t = -1.613, p = .109.

A N O V A s were run on affect intensity using the four groups derived from the median-split technique. The ANOVAs for overall affect intensity and positive affect intensity were both significant at p = .01, F(3,125) > 3.54. The A N O V A for negative affect intensity failed to reach significance [F(3,125) = 1.734, p = .16]. Individual t tests were then run to compare the means of each group for overall and positive affect intensity. Once again, these results are represented graphically. (See Fig. 2.)

Only those individuals who endorse the expressive traits as highly self- descriptive (i.e., the androgynous and feminine groups) also report experi-

160 Hunt

Global ~.tteot h~t, enJit~ b7 Sex Role Positive ~ e o t Intensity' by Sex Polo

+"I o o j +'I

3.o j+.o

3 3 A F M U

Sex Role

b

A F M U Sex Role

N ~ t ~ m ~ m ~ Intm~t~ b~ ~

Androgynous

Femlnlne

Mm.=ullne

[----1 Undifferentiated

T '= Standard error of the mean Different letters indicate significant differences of at least p - .05

A F M U Sex Role

Fig. 2. Affect intensity means by SBSRI category.

encing more intense affect overall. While the androgynous group reported significantly more intense positive affect intensity than the masculine group (t = 2.474, p < .05) they do not differ significantly from the feminine group (t = 0.273, p = .79). The feminine and masculine groups are not significantly different on positive affect intensity, although the trends are clearly in the expected direction (t = 1.302, p = .20). There is also a nonsignificant trend for those who endorse the instrumental traits as highly self-descriptive to report experiencing less intense negative affect.

Expressiveness

Table IV. SBSRI and Well-Being Means and Standard Deviations by Sex a

161

Sample

Total Men Women Measure (n = 159) (n = 72) (n = 87)

SBSRI 4.974 5.079 4.887 Mean Instrumental (0.885) (0.926) (0,846) SD

5.000 5.200 5.400 Median

SBSRI 5.269 5.164 5.357 Mean Expressive (0.882) (0.872) (0.886) SD

5,400 5.400 5.500 Median

Depression 6.692 6.264 7.046 Mean (6.071) (6.194) (5.980) SD

Positive 16.440 17.000 15.977 Mean Affect (6.236) (5.768) (6.596) SO

Affect 0.655 0.705 0.614 Mean Balance (0.959) (1.036) (0.895) SD

Life 4.788 4.851 4.736 Mean Satisfaction (1.412) (1.463) (1.374) SD

Affect b 3.737 3.677 3,784 Mean Intensity (0.539) (0.556) (0,524) SD

Positive b 3.848 3.801 3.885 Mean Affect (0.619) (0.617) (0.622) SD Intensity

Negative b 3.707 3.583 3.802 Mean Affect (0.732) (0.730) (0.723) SD Intensity

aTheir are no significant differences between men and women on any of these measures. There was a nonsignificant trend for women to report more negative affect intensity than men at t = 1.761, p = .08.

bFor affect intensity, total n = 129, men n = 57, women n = 72.

Sex Differences

Men and women did not differ significantly on any of the well-being measures employed in this study. (See Table IV.)

Men and women did differ, however, in their pat tern of responding on the SBSRI. Instrumentali ty and expressiveness scores were calculated for men and women. The t tests were done compar ing the men ' s and women ' s means on the two traits. Both tests failed to achieve conventional significance levels using two-tailed tests (for instrumentality, t = 1.37, p = .17, for expressiveness, t = 1.38, p = .17). Note that the trends were in

162 Hunt

the expected directions, however, with women reporting slightly less instrumentality and slightly more expressiveness than men.

A second t test was then conducted on the mean difference between the instrumental and expressive scale scores. That is, for each individual, their mean instrumental score was subtracted from their mean expressive score (for men, the mean difference = .08, for women, the mean difference = .46). This difference score was marginally significantly (t = 1.908, p = .058). Thus men in this sample tended to endorse the traits equally, while women tended to endorse the expressive traits more than the instrumental traits.

DISCUSSION

The hypothesis that the expressive traits would predict well-being re- ceived strong support. The results show that both instrumentality and expressiveness as measured by the SBSRI are equally, independently related to several major components of well-being, including depression, positive affect, affect balance, and life satisfaction. This is contrary to previous findings, which have linked only the instrumental traits consistently with well- being. In the old terminology, masculine and feminine individuals fair equally well, while androgynous individuals, enjoying the additive benefits of both sets of adaptive traits, are by far the best off.

Another interesting finding of the study is that only the expressive traits were significantly associated with affect intensity overall, and with positive affect intensity in particular. That is, individuals high in the expressive traits such as nurturance and sympathy described themselves as more likely to feel joyful or elated than simply content. The instrumental traits, on the other hand, were not significantly related to any aspects of affect intensity. Neither the expressive nor the instrumental traits were related significantly to negative affect intensity. The instrumental traits, however, showed a small, nonsignificant negative correlation with negative affect intensity. That is, individuals high in the instrumental traits tended to report experiencing less intensity anxiety, shame and sadness.

There are at least two possible explanations of this finding. First, it is possible that those individuals who value the affiliative domain may actually be happier. That is, while the instrumental traits may stave off depression and contr ibute to life satisfaction, the expressive traits may contribute in some causal way to joy. Alternatively, it may be that intensely happy people are more able to engage in affiliative behaviors and may de- velop the expressive side of their personality more fully.

Expressiveness 163

Second, it may be that a ruminative cognitive style is associated with both variables. That is, expressive individuals are more likely to engage in self-focused rumination about their feelings (Conway et al., 1990). In turn, rumination serves to intensify affect (Larsen & Diener, 1987). This explanation fails to account for the lack of a significant relationship between the expressive traits and negative affect intensity, however. Therefore, it seems most likely that one version of the first hypothesis is correct.

Several of the results in this paper require closer examination, however. First there is at least one artifactual explanation that must be addressed. It is possible that these results were mediated by self-presentational concerns. Clearly, equating the SBSRI items for social desirability was cru- cial to obtaining strong results for the expressive traits. Could it be that what is being measured by all of the instruments employed in this study is the subject's desire to present him or herself in a favorable light? This would account for the correlations and would render the findings trivial. There is strong evidence against this interpretation, however. It is well es- tablished that self-presentational issues do not account for the variance in well-being scales, including the scales used in this study (Diener, 1984). In addition, the SBSRI is not merely a measure of self-presentational concern. Structurally, the SBSRI has two distinct factors that are equated for social desirability. Numerous individuals identify themselves as high on one factor and low on the other. Thus the social desirability ratings of the items on the BSRI should be seen as a potential confound, rather than as the focus of the scale. Once this confound is controlled (in the SBSRI) the predictive power of the expressive scale becomes apparent.

Aside from possible artifact, however, there are several issues that need close discussion. First, this study differs from most previous studies in finding that the expressive traits rival the instrumental traits in explaining the variance in depression. The use of the short form of the BSRI certainly contributed to this finding, but is insufficient to explain it. An additional explanation has to do with changing social norms. Whitley (1985) suggested that the smaller relationship of the expressive traits to well-being found by many researchers from the middle to late 1970s might reflect society's low valuation of nurturant relationships. It is possible that this has changed somewhat in the last 15 years.

A similar interpretation follows the learned helplessness model of depression (Abramson et al., 1978). It has previously been hypothesized that the feminine or expressive traits are depressogenic because they result in helplessness training (e.g., Radloff & Monroe, 1978; Radloff & Rae, 1979; Baucom, 1983; Baucom & Danker-Brown, 1979, 1984). It could be that certain masculine or instrumental traits that were efficacious in the past, such as aggression and dominance, are no longer useful in accomplishing

164 Hunt

life goals. Sensitivity and warmth, on the other hand, may have become problem-solving strategies that are equally as effective as assertiveness and independence, at least among college students in the Northeastern United States. Note, for example, the appearance in many women's magazines of articles on feminine managerial styles that emphasize cooperation, support, and encouragement rather than competitive self-assertion.

Second, I found no significant sex differences among the well-being measures. Male and female subjects did not differ in depression, positive affect, affect balance, life satisfaction, or affect intensity. This lack of a significant sex difference in the well-being measures is not entirely surprising, however. While it is well documented that there is a sex difference in depression in the general population (Weissman & Klerman, 1977; Nolen- Hoeksema, 1987), it is also well documented that this sex difference often fails to appear in college student populations (Hammen & Padesky, 1977; Stangler & Printz, 1980; Nolen-Hoeksema, 1987). It may be that the psychological and sociological differences that contribute to the sex difference in depression do not exist, or are attenuated in the college environment.

Third, I found only one marginally significant sex difference in the pattern of responding to the SBSRI. The instrumental and expressive scores did not show a significant sex difference, while the difference score between the two sets of traits was marginally significant. How can this be explained?

The lack of a robust sex difference may be due to the nature of the sample. It may be that students admitted to a prestigious university, such as the University of Pennsylvania, are particularly likely to be a fairly "androgynous" group. That is, men and women who are mostly middle-class, intelligent college students may resemble each other more closely than men and women in the general population. Further, it may be that the college admissions process selects for relatively assertive women and relatively nurturant men.

Note, however, that the BSRI was originally validated on students at Cornell (Bern, 1974), an equally prestigious and selective university. The only difference between these two samples should be the intervening 15 years. This adds credence to the argument that a cohort effect is reflecting the social changes those intervening years have brought about. It is clear from factor analytic studies that the SBSRI is composed of two factors. It is no longer clear, however, that one should automatically expect to see sex differences in the measure in every sample.

Indeed, it may be that the SBSRI can no longer claim construct validity as a measure of sex role per se. Spence and Helmreich (1980, 1983, 1991) have questioned both the face and construct validity of the BSRI and their own similar measure, the Personality Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ) as measures of sex role. They have suggested that both instruments

Expressiveness 165

have construct validity as measures of instrumentality and expressiveness (Parson & Bales, 1955), here envisioned as adaptive personality traits in themselves, not as masculinity and femininity. If this is the case, then there is no a priori reason to expect the two scales to show significant sex differences. Spence and Helmreich concluded, however, that these traits may still have considerable importance for many socially significant behaviors. This view is supported by the current results.

Another possibility is that the SBSRI is a measure of positive self- schema that is divided into the two realms of affiliation and achievement. The role of the self-schema in depression, if not other aspects of well-being, has come under intense scrutiny of late (Segal, 1988). Depressed individuals seem to have highly accessible negative self-schemata (e.g., Kuiper & Hig- gins, 1985; Bargh & Tota, 1988). For example, depressed people process negative trait adjectives more quickly and recall them better than do nondepressed people. Depressed people are also more likely to endorse negative trait adjectives as self-descriptive. Nondepressed people, however, seem to have highly accessible positive self-schemata. They process positive trait adjectives more quickly and recall them better than do depressed people, and are also more likely to endorse positive trait adjectives as self-descriptive.

The SBSRI is a list of positive trait adjectives. These adjectives are congruent with the positive self-schema manifested by nondepressed individuals. In light of the above, it is not surprising that the SBSRI should be correlated with well-being. While it may no longer be a measure of gender schema, or sex role, it is certainly a measure positive self-schema in two distinct domains.

Finally, the implications of this study stem from the clear advantages enjoyed by androgynous individuals. While a simple correlational study does not allow one to draw conclusions about causality, it is clear that the expressive traits are associated in some way with well-being. Until the time comes when causal questions can be answered, perhaps we should encour- age the development of both sets of traits in our children, our patients, and ourselves.

Future Directions

The failure to find significant sex differences in well-being, especially in depression, clearly suggests the need for replication in a noncollege student sample.

While the parallels between the literature on instrumentality, expressiveness, and well-being and the literature on the self-schema in depression

166 Hunt

are informative, they are clearly speculative as well. A further merging of the two might be mutually beneficial. Bern (1984) has already introduced many of the research paradigms of schematic processing into her investigation of sex roles. The self-schema literature, and the broader literature on depression (e.g., Haaga, Dyck, & Ernst, 1991) on the other hand, have only recently begun to take into account the differences in the affiliation (expressive) and achievement (instrumental) domains (Hammen, Marks, Mayol,~c.~leMayo, 1985).

Particularly worthy of follow up is the finding that the expressive traits are associated with enhanced intensity of positive affect, while the instrumental traits may be associated with less intense negative affect. It is time to take the contribution of the expressive traits to well-being seriously.

REFERENCES

Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74.

Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B (1976). Social indicators of well-being, New York: Plenum Press.

Antill, J. K., & Cunningham, J. D. (1979). Self-esteem as a function of masculinity in both sexes. Journal of Consulth~g and Clinical Psychology, 47, 783-785.

Bargh, J. A., & Tota, M. E. (1988). Context-dependent automatic processing in depression: Accessibility of negative constructs with regard to self but not to others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 925-939.

Baucom, D. H. (1983). Sex role identity and the decision to regain control among women: A learned helplessness investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 334-343.

Baucom, D. H., & Danker-Brown, P. (1979). Influence of sex roles on the development of learned helplessness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 928-936.

Baucom, D. H., & Danker-Brown, P. (1984). Sex role identify and sex-stereotyped tasks in the development of learned helplessness in women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 422-430.

Baucom, D. H., & Weiss, B. (1986). Peers' granting of control to women with different sex role identities: Implications for depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1075-1080.

Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Garbin, M. G. (1988), Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 77-100.

Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychology, 4, 53-63.

Bem, S. L~ (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.

Bem, S. L. (1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 634-643.

Bem, S. L. (1977). On the utility of alternative procedures for assessing psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 196-205.

Bern, S. L. (1979) . T h e o r y and m e a s u r e m e n t of a n d r o g y n y : A rep ly to the Pedhazur-Tetenbaum and Locksley-Colten critiques. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1047-1054.

Expressiveness 167

Bem, S. L. (1984). Androgyny and gender schema theory: A conceptual and empirical integration. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 32, 179-226.

Bem, S. L., Martyna, W., & Watson, C. (1976). Sex typing and androgyny: Further exploration of the expressive domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 1016-1023.

Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine. Campbell, A. (1981). The sense of well-being in America: Recent patterns and trends. New York:

McGraw-Hill. Conway, M., Giannopoulos, C., & Stienfenhofer, K. (1990). Response styles to sadness are

related to sex and sex-role orientation. Sex Roles, 22, 579-587. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575. Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). The independence of positive and negative affect.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105-1117. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life

scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. Diener, E., Colving, C. R., Pavot, W. G., & Allman, A. (1991). The psychic costs of intense

positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 492-503. Diener, E., Larsen, R. J., Levine, S., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). Intensity and frequency:

Dimensions underlying positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1253-1265.

Downing, N. E. (1979). Theoretical and operational conceptualizations of psychological androgyny: Implications for measurement. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3, 284-292.

Dunlap, W. P., & Kemery, E. R. (1987). Failure to detect moderating effects: Is multicollinearity the problem? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 418-420.

Elpern, S., & Karp, S. A. (1984). Sex-role orientation and depressive symptomatology. Sex Roles, 10, 987-992.

Feather, N. T. (1985). Masculinity, femininity, self-esteem and subclinical depression. Sex Roles, 12, 491-500.

Frable, D. E. S., &Bem, S. L. (1985). If you are gender schematic, all members of the opposite sex look alike. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 459-468.

Gaa, J. P., Liberman, D., & Erdwins, T. A. (1979). A comparative factor analysis of the Bem Sex Role Inventory and the Personal Attributes Questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35, 592-598.

Ganong, L. H., & Coleman, M. (1984). Sex, sex roles and emotional expressiveness. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 146, 405-411.

Gaudreau, P. (1977). Factor analysis of the Bern Sex Role Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 299-302.

Haaga, D. A. F., Dyck, M. J., & Ernst, D. (1991). Empirical status of cognitive theory of depression. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 215-236.

Hall, J. A., & Taylor, M. C. (1985). Psychological Androgyny and the Masculinity x Femininity Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 429-435.

Hammen, C. L., & Padesky, C. A. (1977). Sex differences in expression of depressive responses on the Beck Depression Inventory. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86, 609-614.

Hammen, D., Marks, T., deMayo, P., & Mayol, A. (1985). Self-schemas and risk for depression: A prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1147-1159.

Kelly, J. A., Furman, W., & Young, V. (1978). Problems associated with the typological measures of sex roles and androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 1574-1576.

Kuiper, N. A., & Higgins, E. T. (1985). Social cognition and depression: A general integrative perspective. Social Cognition, 1, 223-239.

Larsen, R. J., & Diener, E. (1987). Affect intensity as an individual difference characteristic: A review. Journal of Research in Personality, 21, 1-39.

Lubinsky, D., Tellegen, A., & Butcher, J. N. (1981). The relationship between androgyny and subjective indicators of emotional well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 722-730.

168 Hunt

Mugford, S. K., & Lally, J. (1981). Sex, reported happiness, and the well-being of married individuals: A test of Bernard's hypothesis in an Australian sample. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 969-975.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1987). Sex differences in unipolar depression: evidence and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 259-282.

Orlofsky, J. L., Aslin, A. L., & Ginsburg, S. D. (1977). Differential effectiveness of two classification procedures on the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 41, 414-416.

Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (1955). FamUy, socialization and interaction process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Payne, F. D., & Futterman, J. R. (1983). "Masculinity," "femininity," and adjustment in college men. Journal of Research in Personality, 17, 110-124.

Pedhazur, E. J., & Tetenbaum, T. J. (1979). Bern Sex Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 37, 996-1017.

Pidano, A. E., & Tennen, H. (1985). Transient depressive experiences and their relationship to gender and sex role orientation. Sex Roles, 12, 97-110.

Pyke, S. W. (1985). Androgyny: An integration, htternational Journal of Women "s Studies, 8, 529-539.

Radloff, L. S, & Monroe, M. K. (1978). Sex differences in helplessness---with implications for depression. Career Development and Counseling of Women, Edited by Hansen, S., & Rapoza, R.

Radloff, L. S., & Rae, D. S. (1979). Susceptibility and precipitating factors in depression: Sex differences and similarities. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, 174-181.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069-1081.

Segal, Z. V. (1988). Appraisal of the self-schema construct in cognitive models of depression. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 147-162.

Spence, J. T. (1991). Do the BSRI and PAQ measure the same or different concepts? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 141-165.

Spence, J. T. (1993). Gender-related traits and gender ideology: Evidence for a multifaetorial theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 624-635.

Spenee, J. T., & Helmreieh, R. L. (1979). On assessing "androgyny." Sex Roles, 5, 721-737. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1983). Beyond face validity: A comment on Nicholls, Licht

& Pearl. Psychology Bulletin, 94, 181-184. Spenee, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1980). Masculine instrumentality and feminine

expressiveness: Their relationships with sex attitudes and behaviors. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 147-163.

Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Stapp, J. (1974). The Personal Attributes Questionnaire. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4, 127.

Spenee, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Stapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 29-39.

Stacey, C. A., & Gatz, M. (1991). Cross-sectional age differences and longitudinal change on the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 46, 76-78.

Stangler, R. S., & Printz, A. M. (1980). DSM-III: Psychiatric diagnosis in a university population. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 937-940.

Stoppard, J. M., & Paisley, K. J. (1987). Masculinity, femininity, life stress and depression. Sex Roles, 16, 489-495.

Taylor, M. C., & Hall, J. A. (1982). Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods and conclusions. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 347-366.

Tellegen, A. (1982). Brief Manual for the Differential Personality Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota.

Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (in preparation). Exploring personality through test construction. In S. R. Briggs & J .M. Cheek (eds.), Omnibus measures of personality.

Expressiveness 169

Tinsley, E. G., Sullivan-Guest, S., & McGuire, J. (1984). Feminine sex roles and depression in middle-aged women. Sex Roles, 11, 25-32.

Thompson, B. (1989). Meta-analysis of factor structure studies: A case example with Bem's androgyny measure. Journal of Experimental Education, 57, 187-197.

Thompson, B., & Melancon, J. (1986). Factor structure of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 19, 77-83.

Warr, P., Barter, J., & Brownbridge, G. (1983). On the independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 644-651.

Weissman, M. M., & Klerman, G. L. (1977). Sex differences in the epidemiology of depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 34, 98-111.

Whetton, C., & Swindels, T. (1977). A factor analysis of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 150-153.

Whitley, B. E. (1983). Sex role orientation and self-esteem: A critical metal-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 765-778.

Whitley, B. E. (1985). Sex role orientation and psychological well-being: Two meta-analyses. Sex Roles, 12, 207-225.

Whitley, B. E. (1988). Masculinity, femininity and self-esteem: A multitrait-multimethod analysis. Sex Roles, 18, 419-431.

Zevon , M. A., & Te l l egen , A. (1982). The s t ruc tu re of mood change: An ideographic/nomothetic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 111-122.