Cited by 111Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesGender Roles and Identity StudiesLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy

Traditional Masculinity as a Risk Factor for Suicidal Ideation: Cross-Sectional and Prospective Evidence from a Study of Young Adults

Coleman, Daniel·2015·Archives of Suicide Research

Abstract

Traditional masculinity is hypothesized to be associated with suicidal ideation, and traditional masculinity is predicted to interact with stressors, intensifying suicidal ideation. Cross-sectional and prospective data from a study of 2,431 young adults was analyzed using hierarchical regression main effects and interaction models. Traditional masculinity was associated with suicidal ideation, second only in strength to depression, including when controlling for other risk factors. Prospective effects were substantially weaker. There was mixed evidence for traditional masculinity by stress interactions. The results provide preliminary support for the role of traditional masculinity in suicidal ideation, but the relationship should be tested in studies of suicide attempts and mortality. Implications for prevention and intervention are explored.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13811118.2014.957453

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Some quantitative studies have found positive associations between adherence to masculine norms and suicidal thoughts and behaviours in males from the general population and from particular at-risk groups.

    “Some quantitative studies have found positive associations between adherence to masculine norms and suicidal thoughts and behaviours in males from the general population [14,15,2] and from particular at-risk groups [16].”

    From Masculinity and suicidal thinking (2017) · cites this paper as [14]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coleman, D.
Corresponding author
Coleman, Daniel
Venue
Archives of Suicide Research
Published
2015-07-03
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
366-384
ISSN
  • 1381-1118 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-6136
OpenAlex
W1963585595
Cited by
111
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Suicide Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Keywords
traditional masculinity, suicidal ideation, young adults, depression, stress, gender norms, suicide risk factors, suicide prevention
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Gender Identity, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Self Concept, Socialization, Stereotyping, Health Behavior, Young Adult, Masculinity, Suicidal Ideation

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