The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Two-Question Method for Assessing Gender Categories in the Social and Medical Sciences
Abstract
Three studies (N = 990) assessed the statistical reliability of two methods of determining gender identity that can capture transgender spectrum identities (i.e., current gender identities different from birth-assigned gender categories). Study 1 evaluated a single question with four response options (female, male, transgender, other) on university students. The missing data rate was higher than the valid response rates for transgender and other options using this method. Study 2 evaluated a method of asking two separate questions (i.e., one for current identity and another for birth-assigned category), with response options specific to each. Results showed no missing data and two times the transgender spectrum response rate compared to Study 1. Study 3 showed that the two-question method also worked in community samples, producing near-zero missing data. The two-question method also identified cisgender identities (same birth-assigned and current gender identity), making it a dynamic and desirable measurement tool for the social and medical sciences.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Taylor, S. E., Saphire-Bernstein, S., & Seeman, T. E. (2010) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797609356507 · Cited by 256
Cited by
Bauer, G. R., Braimoh, J., Scheim, A. I., & Dharma, C. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178043 · Cited by 452
What is gender, anyway: a review of the options for operationalising gender
Lindqvist, A., Sendén, M. G., & Renström, E. A. (2021) · Psychology & Sexuality · doi:10.1080/19419899.2020.1729844 · Cited by 424
Cahill, S., Singal, R., Grasso, C., King, D., Mayer, K., Baker, K., & Makadon, H. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0107104 · Cited by 288
Gender (mis)measurement: Guidelines for respecting gender diversity in psychological research
Cameron, J. J., & Stinson, D. A. (2019) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12506 · Cited by 246
Gender inequalities during COVID-19
Fisher, A. N., & Ryan, M. K. (2021) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430220984248 · Cited by 189
Metadata
- Authors
- Tate, C. C., Ledbetter, J. N., & Youssef, C. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Sex Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 767-776
- ISSN
- 0022-4499 (ISSN-L)
- 1559-8519
- OpenAlex
- W2168949273
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Two-Question Method for Assessing Gender Categories in the Social and Medical Sciences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00224499.2012.690110
- The paper
- Tate, C. C., Ledbetter, J. N., & Youssef, C. P. (2013). A Two-Question Method for Assessing Gender Categories in the Social and Medical Sciences. Journal of Sex Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.690110
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
