The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Measuring masculinity in the context of chronic disease.
Abstract
Masculine beliefs are influential in men’s responses to illness; however, current measures of masculinity may not be salient for highly prevalent chronic diseases such as prostate cancer. To address this gap, a contextualized measure of masculinity for men with prostate cancer was developed. A novel measure of masculinity, the Masculinity in Chronic Disease Inventory (MCD-I), was developed based on existing qualitative data and tested for acceptability and face validity with 19 men previously treated for prostate cancer. A cross-sectional survey of 403 Australian men with prostate cancer (Mage = 70.34 years; SD = 7.25) then assessed convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity for the MCD-I using existing reliable and valid measures of masculinity, masculine self-esteem, quality of life, erectile dysfunction, and sexual help seeking. A 6-factor structure for the MCD-I (22 items) was confirmed with good to excellent internal reliabilities (alpha = 0.69–0.92) for the subscale domains of Strength, Sexual Importance/Priority; Family Responsibilities; Emotional Self-Reliance; Optimistic Capacity; and Action Approach. Acceptable convergent and divergent validity was supported, and the MCD-I was also able to discriminate between men with severe versus moderate to mild erectile dysfunction (p = .002) and the Sexual Importance/Priority domain discriminated between men who had sought sexual advice and those who had not (p = .005). A contextual approach to measuring masculinity in m…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Frequent subjective masculine stress experiences are associated with vulnerability to psychological distress.
“Frequent subjective masculine stress experiences are associated with vulnerability to psychological distress 21”
From Malignancy, masculinities, and psychological distress: Comparisons made between men with testicular cancer and healthy controls (2024) · cites this paper as [21]
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 77 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Chambers, S. K., Hyde, M. K., Oliffe, J. L., Zajdlewicz, L., Lowe, A., Wootten, A. C., & Dunn, J.
- Affiliations
- Griffith University (AU)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Cancer Council Queensland (AU)
- Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (AU)
- Australian Prostate Centre (AU)
- Venue
- Psychology of Men & Masculinity
- Published
- 2016-07
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 228-242
- ISSN
- 1524-9220 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-151X
- OpenAlex
- W2224325084
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 10.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology of Men & Masculinity (publishedVersion)
- University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland) (submittedVersion)
- Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council
- Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
- Keywords
- masculinity, prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, quality of life, men's health, chronic disease
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review