Gender Equitable Attitudes Among Adolescents: A Validation Study and Associations with Sexual Health Behaviors.

Gender inequitable attitudes are associated with violence perpetration and poor sexual health. There is limited diversity in U.S. samples used to validate gender attitudes measurements. This study assessed a 13-item gender equitable attitudes scale's validity among a sample of predominantly Black adolescent boys (n = 866; mean age = 15.5, range = 13-19 years) and examined associations with sexual health behaviors. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses tested construct validity. Logistic mixed-effects models were used to explore associations between gender equitable attitudes, adolescent relationship abuse, pornography use, and condom use behaviors; linear mixed-effects models explored associations between gender equitable attitudes and condom negotiation self-efficacy. By pooling data from two other gender transformative programs, Sisterhood 2.0 (n = 246, 13-19-year-old females (mean age = 15.2), 73.6% Black/African American) and Coaching Boys into Men Middle School (n = 958, 11-14-year-old males-6th grade: 10.4%, 7th grade: 36.5%, 8th grade: 53.1-56.6% white), measurement invariance was assessed across Black (n = 400) and white (n = 298) race and male (n = 429) and female (n = 246) gender. A three-factor 11-item scale showed construct validity among a sample of Black adolescent boys, weak factorial invariance across Black and white race, and configural invariance across male and female gender. Gender equitable attitudes were associated with less adolescent relationship abuse, higher condom negotiation self-efficacy, and less pornography use. These findings demonstrate some variability in measurements of gender equitable attitudes by race and gender. Targeting harmful gender norms may help prevent adolescent relationship abuse and improve sexual health behaviors.

Gender as a principle of the organization of clinical sleep research.

In 2014 the National Institutes of Health required researchers to examine sex as a biological variable. While this approach is necessary to ensure adequate and appropriate female inclusion in research studies, it puts researchers at high risk for attributing their findings to biological sex differences when instead they may be more appropriately attributed to the influence and expectations of gender. In this paper, we specify how gender works as a principle of the social organization of symptoms, experiences, research, and clinical practice using obstructive sleep apnea symptomology to illustrate these patterns. We draw from psychologist Sandra Bem's account differentiating three specific mechanisms of gender: gender polarization, androcentrism, and biological essentialism.

Authors' Response to Commentaries on "Trouble in Paradigm".

We respond to three commentaries on our essay, "Trouble in Paradigm: 'Gender Transformative' Programming in Violence Prevention," published in this symposium. Dworkin and Barker prompt us to clarify our presentation of "social norms" mechanisms that undergird paradigmatic public health violence prevention programs. Orchowski leads us to elaborate on the problems we perceive in an information-based descriptive norms approach that disregards the gendered organization of both violence perpetration and normative interactions. Finally, Hollander and Pascoe inspire us to think further about strengthening prevention programs to integrate "intersectional accountability" and be "truly gender-transformative."

Trouble in Paradigm: "Gender Transformative" Programming in Violence Prevention.

The World Health Organization encourages a "gender transformative" paradigm for preventing violence against women and girls. Gender transformative interventions engage men and boys to reflect critically on-and then to challenge and change-gender-inequitable attitudes and behaviors. To interpret the mixed findings of research evaluating such programs, we review the "social norms" model that informs the paradigm. We bolster the paradigmatic conceptualization of social norms through insights about how exposure to trauma shapes gendered patterns of victimization and perpetration, about gendered violence from research on homophobic bullying, and about transforming local regimes of gender accountability.

Work, Welfare, and Protection Orders: Modeling Changing Earnings in the Context of Group Differences and Institutional Shifts.

Researchers who study violence against women often face problems when trying to understand the causes of individual changes in the context of group differences, targeted interventions, and institutional shifts. The authors explore these problems through research on the connections among women's earnings, welfare, and protection orders. The authors use multigroup, piecewise, latent growth curve models to explore differences in the initial earnings and earnings changes for two groups: welfare recipients who have and who have not petitioned for a restraining order. The authors further examine these differences in the context of institutional change, specifically the implementation of the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996.

Work-related abuse: a replication, new items, and persistent questions.

This study compared independently developed tools to measure work-related control, abuse, and sabotage. Interviewers administered the Work/School Abuse Scale (W/SAS; Riger, Ahrens, & Blickenstaff, 2000) to 40 welfare recipients, and a Work-Related Control, Abuse, and Sabotage Checklist (WORCASC) to a total of 162 welfare recipients, including the same 40 who answered the W/SAS. I report and compare results on W/SAS and WORCASC with 40 non-sheltered (i.e., not residing in a shelter) respondents and discuss instrument strengths and weaknesses. Measurement analyses provided preliminary empirical answers to questions about the relationship between battering and work. Findings confirmed the reliability of the two instruments, the extent to which they measure something distinct from physical abuse, and their association with relevant outcomes such as being written up, reprimanded, or losing pay at work. Measurement questions are salient in the context of debates over welfare reforms and efforts to reconcile the ways researchers, advocates, service providers, and policy makers understand and address the costs of taking a beating.