Journal List > Korean J Adult Nurs > v.25(3) > 1094559

TOOLS
Kim, Park, and Ko: A Typology: Older Women and Gender Role Identity
Original Research

Korean J Adult Nurs 2013;25(3):289-297.

Published online: 18 June 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7475/KJAN.2013.25.3.289

A Typology: Older Women and Gender Role Identity

Myung-Ae Kim1, Euna Park2, Sung-Hee Ko3,

1College of Nursing, Keimyung University, Daegu

2Department of Nursing, Pukyong National University, Busan

3College of Nursing, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Korea

Corresponding author: Ko, Sung-Hee College of Nursing, Chonbuk National University, San 2-20, Geumam-dong, Dukjin-gu, Jeonju 561-712, Korea. Tel: +82-10-8721-3123, Fax: +82-63-270-3127, E-mail: jane@jbnu.ac.kr

Received 5 November 20125 June 2013       Accepted 22 June 2013

© 2013 Korean Society of Adult Nursing

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to categorize and to understand the structure of subjectivity in the gender role identity of older female adults. The perception of gender role identity is subjective and varies according to the uniqueness of individual experiences and the value of social culture.

Methods

Q-methodology, a technique for extracting subjective opinions was used. In 2010, forty participants completed the Q-sort activity, rating each statement relative to the others. The Q sample has two categories, representing masculinity and femininity, and each category has 20 statements, resulting in 40 adjectives.

Results

Using the Q factor analysis, three classifications were identified: ‘caring-affectionate type,’, ‘assertive-confident type,’ and ‘sensitive-affectionate type.’ Despite the differences among the three types in this research, elderly females are likely to have the understanding and patience to comfort others and care for the children.

Conclusion

The results of this study revealed new dimensional types of gender role identity and raise the issue of why we need to develop methods for the new dimensional types. Based on the results, further research is needed to compare the findings with those of older males or with women of different age groups.

Keywords: Older, Female, Gender, Role, Identity

REFERENCES

Bem S. L.1975. Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 31(4):634–643.
crossref
Echabe A. E.2010. Role identities versus social identities: Masculinity, femininity, instrumentality and communality. Asian Journal of Social Psychology. 13(1):30–43.
crossref
Hooker S. P.., Wilcox S.., Burroughs E. L.., Rheaume C. E.., Courtenay W.2012. The potential influence of masculine identity on health-improving behavior in mid life and older African American men. Journal of Men's Health. 9(2):79–88.
Jacobi J.1974. Complex archetype and symbol. Prince town: Bollingen.
Johnson R. A.1986. Inner work: Using dreams and active imagination for personal growth. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Kim H. K.2007. P sampling and Q-sorting. Journal of Korean Society for the Scientific Study of Subjectivity. 15(2):5–19.
Kim H. S.1995. An empirical study of Korean patriarchal values (II). The Journal of Social Sciences. 14(1):197–216.
Kim K. W.., Yoo M. S.., Cho Y. J.2004. Sex-role identity in female college students: The influence of childhood experience of parental power. Asian Women. 43(1):313–342.
Kim T. H.., Yoo E. H.1987. A study on relationship between sex role identity and life satisfaction among elderly persons. Korean Journal of Human Ecology. 25(4):113–121.
Kim Y. H.2000. A study of the effects on the Korean adolescents' sexual role identity and attitude by the audio-visual program for sexual education. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 30(6):1556–1568.
crossref
Kim Y. H.2004. Gender relation and psychological well-being among the elderly. Korea Journal of Population Studies. 27(1):1–30.
Korea National Statistical Office. 2009, October. Census of elderly population in Korean 2009 year. Seoul: Author. Retrieved September 30, 2009, from Korea National Statistical Office Website:. http://kostat.go.kr.
Kwak S. G.2008. Feminist education. Seoul: Ewha Womans University Press.
Kwak S. G.., Jo H. S.., Yoon H. K.2005. The perceived experiences of gender-role development and conflicts at each life stage. Journal of Korean Women's Studies. 21(2):147–179.
Lee E. A.2006. The relationships of the middle-aged married men and women's gender-role attitude and psychological adjustment. Korean Journal of Human Ecology. 9(1):25–41.
Lee H. S.1997. The femininity of counseling and women counseling. Korean Journal of Psychology: Women. 2(1):1–13.
Lee S. H.2011. Korean women's conceptualization of motherhood: A comparative analysis through oral life histories. Feminism Study. 11(1):59–99.
Lee S. S.., Lee K. J.2001. The effect of economic state, health state, and sex role identity on self esteem of the elderly men and women. Korean Journal of Human Ecology. 4(1):1–10.
Lee S. S.., Lee K. J.2002. The stress, social support and psychological well-being of the elderly. Journal of the Korea Gerontology Society. 22(1):1–20.
Littlefield M. B.2003. Gender role identity and stress in African American women. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment. 8(4):93–104.
crossref
Park E. A.2011. Gender role identity of female college students and the diversity of its types. Korean Journal of Adult Nursing. 23(5):423–433.
Paik J. E.2010. Effects of social support on psychological health for old women and old men. The Korean Journal of Women Psychology. 15(3):425–445.
Perrig-Chiello P.., Hutchison S.2010. Family caregivers of elderly persons: A differential perspective on stressors, resources, and well-being. The Journal of Gerontopsychol-ogy and Geriatric Psychiatry. 23(4):195–206.
Pikler V. I.., Brown C.2010. Cancer patients' and partners' psychological distress and quality of life: Influence of gender role. Journal of Psychosocial Oncology. 28(1):43–60.
crossref
Spence J. T.1984. Gender identity and its implications for the concepts of masculinity and femininity. In T. B. Sondereg-ger (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation:. Psychology of Gender. 32:59–95.
Stephenson W.1953. The study of behavior: Q technique & its methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Table 1.
Distribution of Q Sample Card
Variables Most unlike       Neutral       Most like
Score -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
No. of card 2 3 4 4 6 4 4 3 2
Table 2.
Q Sample 7and Z-score according to Type
Q statement Z-score
Type 1 (n=15) Type 2 (n=12) Type 1 (n=13)
1. Acts as a leader -1.2 0.8 -0.5
2. Aggressive -2 -0.2 -1.5
3. Ambitious -1.1 -1.4 -1.3
4. Assertive -1.2 1.6 0.2
5. Brave -0.6 0.6 -0.4
6. Broad-minded -0.1 1.1 -1
7. Competitive -1.2 -0.2 -0.4
8. Defends own beliefs 0.4 1 0.1
9. Dominant -1.7 -1.2 -2.2
10. Emotion conceal -0.5 -0.7 -1
11. Faithful 1.3 1.8 0.1
12. Forceful -0.5 0.3 -0.6
13. Independent 0.1 0.2 -1
14. Initiative -0.4 1 -0.5
15. Makes decisions easily -0.5 -0.3 0.3
16. Selfish -1.7 -2.8 -2.3
17. Strong character -0.3 0.4 -0.2
18. Taciturn 0.5 -1.4 -1.6
19. Take risks -0.8 -0.3 -1.2
20. Dealing with serious matters well 0.1 0.4 -0.4
21. Affectionate 0.5 0.2 1.7
22. Take care of children 1.2 0.6 1.3
23. Charming -0.9 -0.9 1.1
24. Delicate 0.8 -0.4 0.5
25. Does not use harsh language 0.9 -0.2 0.9
26. Soothe others well 1.3 1.8 1.1
27. Enjoying romantic things -0.3 -0.3 1
28. Gentle 1.4 -0.8 0.2
29. Patient 1.4 0.2 1
30. Invest in appearance 0.4 -0.1 0.9
31. Jealous -1.6 0.1 0.2
32. Loving beautiful things 0.7 0.5 1.8
33. Sensitive to the needs of others 0.8 1.2 0.3
34. Shy 0.5 -1.6 -0.1
35. Sweet 0.7 -0.6 0.9
36. Sympathetic 1.3 0.8 1.2
37. Talkative -1.1 -1 -0.2
38. Tender 0.6 -0.1 0.1
39. Understanding 1.6 1.3 1.1
40. Yielding 0.9 -0.9 0.3
Table 3.
Descending array of Z-score (Greater than±1) and Item Description for each Type
Type Q statement Z score
Type 1 (n=15) 39. Understanding 1.58
29. Patient 1.41
28. Gentle 1.40
36. Sympathetic 1.32
26. Soothe others well 1.29
11. Faithful 1.26
22. Take care of children 1.22
37. Talkative -1.07
3. Ambitious -1.09
7. Competitive -1.17
1. Acts as a leader -1.20
4. Assertive -1.24
31. Jealous -1.63
9. Dominant -1.65
16. Selfish -1.70
2. Aggressive -1.98
Type 2 (n=12) 11. Faithful 1.78
26. Soothe others well 1.76
4. Assertive 1.63
39. Understanding 1.30
33. Sensitive to the needs of others 1.22
6. Broad- minded 1.14
8. Defends own beliefs 1.04
14. Initiative 1.03
9. Dominant -1.15
18. Taciturn -1.36
3. Ambitious -1.41
37. Talkative -1.56
34. Shy -1.63
16. Selfish -2.76
Type 3 (n=13) 32. Loving beautiful things 1.77
21. Affectionate 1.72
22. Take care of children 1.26
36. Sympathetic 1.23
26. Soothe others well 1.15
39. Understanding 1.13
23. Charming 1.10
6. Broad- minded -1.02
19. Take risks -1.15
3. Ambitious -1.29
2. Aggressive -1.51
18. Taciturn -1.61
9. Dominant -2.16
16. Selfish -2.26
TOOLS
Similar articles