Exploring the Domains of Gender as Measured by a New Gender, Pain and Expectations Scale

Maryam Ghodrati, David M Walton, Joy C MacDermid, Maryam Ghodrati, David M Walton, Joy C MacDermid

Abstract

Background: While sex- or gender-based differences in pain expression have been documented, exploration of traditionally genderized traits on pain has been hampered by the lack of strong measurement tools. This study evaluated the structural validity of a 16-item "Gender personality traits" subscale of a recently developed Gender, Pain and Expectations Scale (GPES). Methods: Data were drawn from an existing database of 248 participants (65.7% female). Maximum likelihood-based confirmatory factor analysis was carried out while considering the conceptual meaningfulness of subscales to evaluate the factor structure identified by these traits. Construct validity was explored using a priori hypotheses regarding anticipated mean differences in scores between biological male and female participants. Results: A meaningful factor structure could not be defined with all 16 items. Through conceptual and statistical triangulation a three-factor structure informed by 10 items was identified that satisfied acceptable fit criteria. The factors were termed "Emotive," "Relationship-Oriented," and "Goal-Oriented." Evidence of construct validity was supported through significant sex-based differences (p ≤ 0.02) in the expected directions for all three subscales. Conclusions: Review of the items in the three factors led the researchers to endorse a move away from naming these "masculine" and "feminine," rather focusing on the nature of the traits: "Relationship-oriented," "Emotive," and "Goal-oriented." Implications for researchers conducting sex/gender-based pain research are discussed. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT02711085.

Keywords: GPES; gender; gender roles; pain; psychometrics.

Conflict of interest statement

No competing financial interests exist.

© Maryam Ghodrati et al., 2021; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Path diagram for the CFA of the Model 1 (two first-order factors). Values are standardized path coefficients for items. The loading for each item is shown above the arrow. e = error. CFA, confirmatory factor analysis.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.
Path diagram for the CFA of the Model 4 (three first-order factors). Values are standardized path coefficients for items. The loading for each item is shown above the arrow. e = error.
FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.
Compare mean scores of subscales (relationship-oriented, emotive, goal-oriented) in male and female. Sex-based differences are significant (p ≤ 0.02) for all three subscales. Error bars: 95% CI. CI, confidence interval.

References

    1. Gorczyca R, Filip R, Walczak E. Psychological aspects of pain. Ann Agric Environ Med 2013;Spec no. 1:23–27
    1. Garland EL. Pain processing in the human nervous system. Prim Care 2012;39:561–571
    1. Roditi D, Robinson ME. The role of psychological interventions in the management of patients with chronic pain. Psychol Res Behav Manag 2011;4:41–49
    1. Phillips CJ. The cost and burden of chronic pain. Rev pain 2009;3:2–5
    1. Fillingim RB, Maixner W. Gender differences in the responses to noxious stimuli. Pain Forum 1995;4:209–221
    1. Defrin R, Shramm L, Eli I. Gender role expectations of pain is associated with pain tolerance limit but not with pain threshold. Pain 2009;145:230–236
    1. Riley JL, Robinson ME, Wise EA, Myers CD, Fillingim RB. Sex differences in the perception of noxious experimental stimuli: A meta-analysis. Pain [Internet] 1998;74:181–187
    1. Edwards RR, Dworkin RH, Turk DC, et al. . Patient phenotyping in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 2016;157:1851–1871
    1. Bartley EJ, Fillingim RB. Sex differences in pain: A brief review of clinical and experimental findings. Br J Anaesth 2013;111:52–58
    1. Tashani OA, Alabas OAM, Johnson MI. Cold pressor pain responses in healthy libyans: Effect of sex/gender, anxiety, and body size. Gend Med 2010;7:309–319
    1. Edwards I, Jones M, Carr J, Braunack-Mayer A, Jensen GM. Clinical reasoning strategies in physical therapy. Phys Ther 2004;84:312–330
    1. Jones A, Zachariae R. Investigation of the interactive effects of gender and psychological factors on pain response. Br J Health Psychol 2004;9:405–418
    1. Chesterton LS, Barlas P, Foster NE, Baxter GD, Wright CC. Gender differences in pressure pain threshold in healthy humans. Pain 2003;101:259–266
    1. Fillingim RB, King CD, Ribeiro-Dasilva MC, Rahim-Williams B, Riley JL. Sex, gender, and pain: A review of recent clinical and experimental findings. J Pain 2009;10:447–485
    1. Bernardes SF, Keogh E, Lima ML. Bridging the gap between pain and gender research: A selective literature review. Eur J Pain 2008;12:427–440
    1. Alabas OA, Tashani OA, Tabasam G, Johnson MI. Gender role affects experimental pain responses: A systematic review with meta-analysis 2012;16:1211–1223
    1. Dixon-Woods M, Shaw RL, Agarwal S, Smith JA. The problem of appraising qualitative research. Qual Saf Health Care 2004;13:223–225
    1. Greenspan JD, Craft RM, LeResche L, et al. . Studying sex and gender differences in pain and analgesia: A consensus report. Pain 2007;132(SUPPL. 1):26–45
    1. Myers CD, Riley JL, Robinson ME. Psychosocial contributions to sex-correlated differences in pain. Clin J Pain 2003;19:225–232
    1. Niesters M, Dahan A, Kest B, et al. . Do sex differences exist in opioid analgesia? A systematic review and meta-analysis of human experimental and clinical studies. Pain 2010;151:61–68
    1. Racine M, Tousignant-Laflamme Y, Kloda LA, Dion D, Dupuis G, Choinire M. A systematic literature review of 10 years of research on sex/gender and pain perception—Part 2: Do biopsychosocial factors alter pain sensitivity differently in women and men? Pain 2012;153:619–635
    1. Westbrook L, Saperstein A. New categories are not enough: Rethinking the measurement of sex and gender in social surveys. Source Gend Soc 2015;29:534–560
    1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. What a difference sex and gender make: A gender, sex and health research case book. [Internet] 2012. Available at: Accessed March24, 2021
    1. Clayton JA, Tannenbaum C. Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research? JAMA 2016;316:1863.
    1. Kroska A. Conceptualizing and measuring gender ideology as an identity. Gend Soc 2000;14:368–394
    1. Bornstein MH. The SAGE encyclopedia of lifespan human development. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, 2018:2437
    1. Hart CG, Saperstein A, Magliozzi D, Westbrook L. Gender and health: Beyond binary categorical measurement. J Health Soc Behav 2019;60:101–118
    1. Hyde JS, Bigler RS, Joel D, Tate CC, van Anders SM. The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. Am Psychol 2019;74:171–193
    1. Alex L, Fjellman Wiklund A, Lundman B, Christianson M, Hammarström A. Beyond a dichotomous view of the concepts of ‘Sex’ and ‘Gender’ focus group discussions among gender researchers at a medical faculty. PLoS One 2012;7:e50275.
    1. Butler J. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999
    1. West C, Zimmerman DH. Accounting for doing gender. Source Gend Soc 2009;23:112–122
    1. Heidari S, Babor TF, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M. Sex and gender equity in research: Rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev 2016;1:2.
    1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Gender, sex and health research guide: A tool for CIHR applicants [Internet]. 2014. Available at: Accessed March24, 2021
    1. Bem SL. The measurement of psychological androgyny. J Consult Clin Psychol 1974;42:155–162
    1. Kröner-Herwig B, Gaßmann J, Tromsdorf M, Zahrend E. The effects of sex and gender role on responses to pressure pain. Psychosoc Med 2012;9:Doc01.
    1. Myers CD, Robinson ME, Riley JL, Sheffield D. Sex, gender, and blood pressure: Contributions to experimental pain report. Psychosom Med [Internet] 2001;63:545–550
    1. Robinson ME, Riley JL, Myers CD, et al. . Gender role expectations of pain: Relationship to sex differences in pain. J Pain [Internet] 2001;2:251–257
    1. Sivagurunathan M, MacDermid J, Chuang JCY, Kaplan A, Lupton S, McDermid D. Exploring the role of gender and gendered pain expectation in physiotherapy students. Can J Pain 2019;3:128–136
    1. Béland S, Jolani S, Pichette F, Renaud J-S. Impact of simple substitution methods for missing data on Classical test theory difficulty and discrimination. Quant Methods Psychol [Internet] 2018;14:180–192
    1. Shrive FM, Stuart H, Quan H, Ghali WA. Dealing with missing data in a multi-question depression scale: A comparison of imputation methods. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:57.
    1. Downey RG, King CV. Missing data in likert ratings: A comparison of replacement methods. J Gen Psychol 1998;125:175–191
    1. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 1995;4:293–307
    1. Van de Schoot R, Lugtig P, Hox J. A checklist for testing measurement invariance. Eur J Dev Psychol 2012;9:486–492
    1. Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 1980;88:588–606
    1. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling [Internet]. New York: Guilford Press, 2005:366.
    1. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model A Multidiscip J 1999;6:1–55
    1. Maccallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling of fit involving a particular measure of model. Psychol Methods 1996;13:130–149
    1. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol Methods Res 1992;21:230–258
    1. Soper DS. A-priori sample size calculator for structural equation models [Software] 2020. Available at Accessed March24, 2021
    1. Myers ND, Ahn S, Jin Y. Sample size and power estimates for a confirmatory factor analytic model in exercise and sport: A monte carlo approach. Res Q Exerc Sport [Internet] 2011;82:412–423
    1. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis [Internet]. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006:6.
    1. Vatine J, Shapira SC, Magora F, Adler D, Magora A. Electronic pressure algometry of deep pain in healthy volunteers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993;74:526–530
    1. Jensen K, Andersen HO, Olesen JLU. Pressure-pain threshold in human temporal region. Evaluation of a new pressure algometer. Pain 1986;2550(lY86):313–323
    1. Isselée H, De Laat A, Bogaerts K, Lysens R. Short-term reproducibility of pressure pain thresholds in masticatory muscles measured with a new algometer. J Orofac Pain 1998;12:203–209
    1. Helfer SG, Mccubbin JA. Does gender affect the relation between blood pressure and pain sensitivity? Int J Behav Med 2001;8:220–229
    1. Sarlani E, Farooq N, Greenspan JD. Gender and laterality differences in thermosensation throughout the perceptible range. Pain 2003;106:9–18
    1. Sarlani E, Greenspan JD. Gender differences in temporal summation of mechanically evoked pain. Pain 2002;97:163–169
    1. Racine M, Tousignant-Laflamme Y, Kloda LA, Dion D, Dupuis G, Choinire M. A systematic literature review of 10 years of research on sex/gender and experimental pain perception—Part 1: Are there really differences between women and men? Pain 2012;153:602–618
    1. Sczesny S, Bosak J, Neff D, Schyns B. Gender stereotypes and the attribution of leadership traits: A cross-cultural comparison. Sex Roles 2004;51:631–645
    1. Kachel S, Steffens MC, Niedlich C. Traditional masculinity and femininity: Validation of a new scale assessing gender roles. Front Psychol 2016;7:956.
    1. Wilde A, Diekman AB. Cross-cultural similarities and differences in dynamic stereotypes: A comparison between germany and the united states. Psychol Women Q 2005;29:188–196
    1. Spence JT, Buckner CE. Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes, and sexist attitudes: What do they signify? Psychol Women Q 2000;24:44–53
    1. Diekman AB, Eagly AH. Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 2000;26:1171–1188
    1. Pedhazur EJ, Tetenbaum TJ. Bem Sex Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique. J Pers Soc Psychol 1979;37:996–1016
    1. Ruch LO. Dimensionality of the bem sex role inventory: A multidimensional analysis. Sex Roles 1984;10:99–117
    1. Abele AE, Wojciszke B. Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. J Pers Soc Psychol 2007;93:751–763
    1. Bohannon WE, Mills CJ. Psychometric properties and underlying assumptions of two measures of masculinity/femininity. Psychol Rep 1979;44:431–450
    1. Harren VA, Kass RA, Tinsley HE, Moreland JR. Influence of sex role attitudes and cognitive styles on career decision making. J Couns Psychol 1978;25:390–398
    1. Wideman TH, Edwards RR, Walton DM, Martel MO, Hudon A, Seminowicz DA. The multimodal assessment model of pain: A novel framework for further integrating the subjective pain experience within research and practice. Clin J Pain 2019;35:212–221
    1. Costa PT, Terracciano A, Mccrae RR. Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. J Pers Soc Psychol 2001;81:322–331
    1. Spence JT, Helmreich R, Stapp J. Personal Attributes Questionnaire: A Measure of Sex Role Stereotypes and Masculinity-Femininity. J Suppl Abstr Serv Cat Sel Doc Psychol 1974;4:617
    1. Nayak S, Shiflett SC, Eshun S, Levine FM. Culture and gender effects in pain beliefs and the prediction of pain tolerance. Cross Cult Res 2000;34:135–151
    1. Heilbrun AB. Measurement of masculine and feminine sex role identities as independent dimensions. J Consult Clin 1976;1:183–190
    1. Berzins JI, Welling MA, Wetter RE. A new measure of psychological androgyny based on the personality research form. J Consult Clin Psychol 1978;46:126–138
    1. Pool GJ, Schwegler AF, Theodore BR, Fuchs PN. Role of gender norms and group identification on hypothetical and experimental pain tolerance. Pain 2007;129:122–129
    1. Wise EA, Price DD, Myers CD, Heft MW, Robinson ME. Gender role expectations of pain: Relationship to experimental pain perception. Pain 2002;96:335–342
    1. Choi N, Fuqua DR. The structure of the Bem Sex Role Inventory: A summary report of 23 validation studies. Educ Psychol Meas 2003;63:872–887
    1. Rose B, Hoffman M, Borders LD. Twenty-five years after the Bem Sex-Role Inventory: A reassessment and new issues regarding classification variability. Couns Dev 2001;34:39–55
    1. Frable DES. Sex typing and gender ideology: Two facets of the individual's gender psychology that go together. J Pers Soc Psychol 1989;56:95–108
    1. Holt CL, Ellis JB. Assessing the current validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Sex Roles 1998;39:929–941
    1. Marsh HW. The structure of masculinity/femininity: An application of confirmatory factor analysis to higher-order factor structures and factorial invariance. Multivariate Behav Res 1985;20:427–449
    1. Marsh HW, Antill JK, Cunningham JD. Masculinity and femininity: A bipolar construct and independent constructs. J Pers 1989;57:625–663
    1. Blanchard-Fields F, Suhrer-Roussel L, Hertzog C. A confirmatory factor analysis of the Bem Sex Role Inventory: Old questions, new answers. Sex Roles 1994;30:423–457

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj