Development of the Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory
By J. Mahalik, E. B. Morray, A. Coonerty-Femiano, L. Ludlow, S. M. Slattery, Andrew P. Smiler. 2005
460 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Gender Studies
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b10e2703efb7fd9558e81866d14606b0f2abeb30
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Clinical Psychology
- Sarah K. Murnen
- M. Tiggemann
- L. Smolak
- Michela Schröder‐Abé
- K. Graff
- Dennis E. Reidy
- Katherine Richmond
- Taryn A. Myers
In Gender Studies
- Bonnie Moradi
- Sarah K. Murnen
- Marina Epstein
- L. Smolak
- Katherine Richmond
- R. Levant
- Susan A. Gelman
- Ann M. Merriwether
Citations in the corpus
- Unmasking the Inequitable Discipline Experiences of Urban Black Girls: Implications for Urban Educational Stakeholders (2011, background): “Traditional standards of femininity as defined by White middle class culture imply that girls and women must be silent, passive, and to place harmony in relationships over their own interests, desires, and feelings (WinkleWagner 2009; Mahalik et al. 2005).”
- Determinants of Gender Essentialism in College Students (2008, methodology): “In addition, we assessed the extent to which participants follow societal dictates regarding femininity and masculinity using the Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory (CFNI; Mahalik et al. 2005) and the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI; Mahalik et al.”
- High implicit self‐esteem is not necessarily advantageous: discrepancies between explicit and implicit self‐esteem and their relationship with anger expression and psychological health (2007, background): “…that may play a role in discrepant SE, for example difficulties in identifying feelings and expressing them to others (Luminet, Bagby, Wagner, Taylor, & Parker, 1999), or experiencing feelings of inadequacy with respect to managing one’s own internal emotional states (Mahalik et al., 2005).”
- Sexual identity as a universal process (2011, background): “Related to this notion is evidence that heterosexual self-presentation is an important societal norm for masculinity (Mahalik et al., 2003; Parent & Moradi, 2009), and aspects of sexual identity such as sexual fidelity and relational orientation are important societal norms for femininity ( Mahalik ”
- Femininity Ideology and Sexual Health in Young Women: A focus on Sexual Knowledge, Embodiment, and Agency (2011, methodology): “This core dimension of femininity is reflected in many new measures of femininity ideology, including the Objectified Relationship with Body subscale of the Adolescent Femininity Ideology Scale (Tolman & Porche, 2000), and the Thinness and Invest in Appearance subscales of the Conformity to Feminine”
- The Femininity Ideology Scale: Factor Structure, Reliability, Convergent and Discriminant Validity, and Social Contextual Variation (2007, background): “The Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory (CFNI; Mahalik et al. 2005) is a related measure, which measures both conformity (as defined by self-reported behaviors, feelings, and thoughts that are consistent with traditional feminine norms) and nonconformity.”
- Men who aggress against women: Effects of feminine gender role violation on physical aggression in hypermasculine men (2009, background): “One question for each of the eight feminine norm domains identified by Mahalik et al. (2005), plus an additional question about career goals, was posed.”
- Are Feminist Women Protected from Body Image Problems? A Meta-analytic Review of Relevant Research (2009, background): “Further, feminist women should generally question traditional feminine roles that are associated with appearance and thinness ( Mahalik et al. 2005 ); and might instead develop self-definitions based on other attributes such as intelligence or creativity that are more empowering.”
- Feminism: What is it Good For? Feminine Norms and Objectification as the Link between Feminist Identity and Clinically Relevant Outcomes (2007, background): “The relationship between conformity to feminine norms and feminist beliefs has been explored, as has the relationship between conformity to feminine norms and eating pathology ( Mahalik et al. 2005 ).”
- Too Sexualized to be Taken Seriously? Perceptions of a Girl in Childlike vs. Sexualizing Clothing (2012, background): “focus on appearance as a means to successfully fulfill the feminine gender stereotype (Mahalik et al. 2005).”
- Sexualizing the Self (2014, background): “The Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory (CNFI)Appearance Scale (Mahalik et al., 2005) taps investment in appearance and includes items such as ‘‘I regularly wear make-up’’ and ‘‘It is important to look physically attractive in public.”
- Measuring Gender: Options and Issues (2010, methodology): “The CFNI (Mahalik et al., 2005) examines adherence to traditional feminine norms and was developed to correspond to the CMNI (Mahalik et al.”
- Conforming to Masculine Norms: Evidence for Validity among Adult Men and Women (2006, unknown): “The latter claim has been interpreted as an argument for empirical distinctness (i.e., r∼0) between ideology and traits and has led some researchers to argue that non-significant relations are evidence of divergent validity for ideology measures (Chu, Porche, & Tolman, 2005; Mahalik et al., 2005 ).”