Cited by 423Gender Roles and Identity StudiesGender and Feminist StudiesSex and Gender in Healthcare

Gender role expectations of pain: relationship to sex differences in pain

Open access
Robinson, Michael E., Riley, Joseph L., Myers, Cynthia D., Papas, Rebecca K., Wise, Emily A., Waxenberg, Lori B., Fillingim, Roger B.·2001·The Journal of Pain

Abstract

Empirical research supports the existence of sex differences in pain; yet these differences are poorly understood. Although biological mechanisms have been posited to explain variability, results of pain modeling manipulations suggest social learning may be a stronger influence on pain response. In this report we use the term sex to refer to the biological category of male or female. We use the term gender to refer to the socially acquired aspects of being male or female sometimes referred to as femininity and masculinity. This study investigated a new measure, the Gender Role Expectations of Pain questionnaire (GREP), which was designed to measure sex-related stereotypic attributions of pain sensitivity, endurance, and willingness to report pain. Subjects were 156 male and 235 female undergraduates at a southeastern university. Psychometric investigation of the questionnaire revealed a 5-factor solution that closely mirrored the theoretical construction of the items. Test-retest reliability was also shown for individual items on a separate sample of 28 subjects. Results supported hypotheses about gender role: both men and women rated men as less willing to report pain than women (F(1,389) = 336, P <.001); both men and women rated women more sensitive (F(1,389) = 9.5, P <.05) and less enduring of pain (F(1,389) = 65.7, P <.001) than men; and men rated their own endurance as higher than the typical man (F(1,389) = 65.7, P <.001). Sex accounted for 46% of the variance in willingness to report pain. Results suggest that the GREP distinguished between the socially learned reactions to pain for men and women. It is recommended that the influence of gender-related expectations for pain be assessed in all studies investigating human sex differences in pain.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1054/jpai.2001.24551

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In randomized controlled trials, individuals with high pre-treatment catastrophizing benefited less from topical analgesics, oral analgesics, and psychosocial treatments.

    “In randomized controlled trials, individuals with high pretreatment levels of catastrophizing demonstrated less benefit from topical analgesics 313, oral analgesics 309, and psychosocial treatments314, 315.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robinson, M. E., Riley, J. L., Myers, C. D., Papas, R. K., Wise, E. A., Waxenberg, L. B., & Fillingim, R. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida Health (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Alabama (US)
Venue
The Journal of Pain
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-10
Volume
2
Issue
5
Pages
251-257
ISSN
1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2034839624
Cited by
423
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 14
FWCI
22.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Sex and Gender in Healthcare
Keywords
sex differences in pain, gender expectations, pain sensitivity, pain tolerance, social learning, gender stereotypes, questionnaire development, psychometric validation

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