Preliminary Validation of Two Brief Measures of Masculine and Feminine Honor Endorsement

Abstract

Researchers have developed numerous individual differences measures to assess people’s endorsement of honor ideology (i.e., beliefs regarding the importance of honor and reputation) with most ranging from 12-36 items in length. Despite having great utility, the length of these measures magnifies the costs associated with survey research, especially in research contexts that use large, representative samples (e.g., health surveys). The present study aimed to develop and validate single-item measures that assess participants’ agreement with gender-specific honor prototypes, as well as short-form versions of the honor ideology for manhood (HIM) and honor ideology for womanhood (HIW) scales. An initial sample of participants (N = 879) completed single-item honor prototype measures, a battery of previously validated honor measures (including the HIM and HIW), and measures of constructs previously shown to be related to the dynamics of honor (e.g., aggression, firearm ownership). A second sample of participants (N = 100) completed the new measures, as well as an abbreviated battery of honor measures, to examine test-retest reliability. Results indicated that the new, brief measures were strongly correlated with both the original HIM and HIW as well as several other established honor measures. Moreover, the associations between these new measures and honor-related outcomes were nearly identical to those found with the original HIM and HIW. Our new measures also demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability, despite being single-item scales. Overall, the present work provides preliminary support for several brief measures of honor endorsement that researchers can use when longer scales are not feasible.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Open scholarship

This article has earned the Center for Open Science badges for Open Data and Open Materials through Open Practices Disclosure. The data and materials are openly accessible at https://osf.io/bhvce/ and https://osf.io/bhvce/.

Notes

1 We also examined whether these relationships held after controlling for whether participants grew up in an honor or a non-honor state, given its relevance for the inculcation of honor norms (see Brown, 2016; Nisbett & Cohen, 1996). Partial correlations indicated that the pattern of results did not change from those reported here. Detailed results are provided in Supplemental Materials.

2 We also tested for gender differences in the relationship between our honor measures and religiosity. Results indicated that none of the interaction terms were significant: MHP (p = .228), FHP (p = .871), CHP (p = .793), HIM-SF (p = .352), and HIW-SF (p = .484).

3 We again examined whether these relationships held after controlling for the state in which participants grew up. Partial correlations indicated that the pattern of results did not change. Detailed results are provided in Supplemental Materials.