Evaluating inclusive gender identity measures for use in quantitative psychological research

ABSTRACT

Despite growing awareness of the discrimination, violence and health disparities experienced by transgender people, most researchers in psychology assess gender identity using a binary categorical measure: ‘male’ and ‘female’. This standard generates imprecise gender identity data, which has significant implications for the social inclusion and well-being of the transgender community. Here, I argue that inclusive gender identity measures should be implemented across all fields of psychology, assess options for collecting gender identity data and offer specific advice for psychological researchers interested in the science of gender identity measurement.

GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS:

• Gender
• gender identity
• transgender
• research methodology
• survey design
• data collection

View correction statement:

Erratum

Acknowledgments

Gloria Fraser was supported by a Victoria University of Wellington Summer Research Scholarship during the preparation of this article. I am grateful to Joseph Bulbulia, Kealagh Robinson and Jennifer Katherine Shields for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. I draw on definitions of sex and gender provided by the Gender Identity in U.S. Surveillance [GenIUSS] Group (2014), who note that ‘the term sex refers to biological differences among male, female, and intersex people’ (p. x). Gender is described as ‘a multidimensional construct that has psychological, social, and behavioural dimensions that include gender identity and gender expression’ (p. ix).

2. Other non-binary people may select both options and be treated as missing data by researchers.

3. If gender was measured inclusively across all suicide and mental health studies, this would provide valuable insight as to whether empirically supported mental health interventions and suicide prevention strategies are effective in transgender communities(Haas et al., 2010).

4. Given that categorical lists differ between studies, the use of this approach may impair collaborative research – data sets using varying response options may be difficult to compare. Researchers using categorical lists should draw on previous literature to inform their response options in order to maintain consistency between studies.

5. Johnson and colleagues (2004) define othering as ‘a process that identifies those that are thought to be different from oneself or the mainstream, and … can reinforce and reproduce positions of domination and subordination’ (p.5253).

6. See the Gender Identity in U.S. Surveillance [GenIUSS] Group (2014) report for recommendations about data collection with a range of populations.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Gloria Fraser

Gloria Fraser is a PhD and clinical psychology student at Victoria University of Wellington. She is interested in the methodology of gender measurement, as well as in the intersection of sex-sexuality-gender diversity and clinical psychology. Her doctoral research focusses on queer and transgender experiences of accessing mental health support in New Zealand.