• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
USAID
Evidence Project
Population Council
Gender and Power Metrics

Gender and Power MetricsGender and Power Metrics

A living database of scales that have been used to measure constructs of gender, agency, power, and control. Search our database of over 600 unique scales from around the world, below. This database is intended for researchers and program staff in the health, social and behavioral sciences.

  • About the database
  • What is a scale?
Name Type Citation Region Country Gender Age Group Use of Scale Level of Generality # of Items Reported Availability Measured Outcomes Urban / Rural Ethnicity Age Range # of Subscales Names of Subscales Response Range Test-retest Reliability Internal Consistency Other Validity Data Sample Items
Sexual Relationship Power Scale (SRPS) Relationship power/ control Berenson KR, Paprocki C, Thomas Fishman M, Bhushan D, El-Bassel N, and Downey G. Rejection sensitivity, perceived power, and HIV risk in the relationships of low-income urban women. Women & Health. 2015; 55: 900-920. North America USA Female Adults only (18+) Measure Individual 23 Partial IPV victimization, Condom Urban 52.2% Latina, 43.4% Black; 4.4% White 18 to 61 2 Relationship control; Decision-making dominance Relationship control subscale ranged from: Strongly Agree (1) to Strongly Disagree (4) and Decision-making dominance subscale ranged from: You (4), Your Partner (1), Both of you equally (2.5) NA Cronbach's alpha: 0.82 NA Relationship Control: "If I asked my partner to use a condom, he would get angry"; "My partner tells me who I can spend time with." Decision Making Dominance: "Who usually has more say about whether you have sex?"; "Who usually has more say about whether you use condoms?"
Women's Empowerment Index Personal power/control Do, M., Kurimoto, N. Women's empowerment and choice of family planning methods. 2010. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Carolina Population Center, MEASURE Evaluation PRH. Sub-Saharan Africa Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia, Ghana, Uganda Female Includes adolescents (<18) Measure Individual 22 Full Contraception Urban, Rural NR 15 to 49 6 Economic empowerment; Socio-cultural empowerment; Autonomy in health decision-making; Fertility preferences; Sexual negotiation activity; Attitudes towards domestic violence NR NA NA We use principal component analysis to construct an overall index. Sometimes a husband is annoyed or angered by things that his wife does. In your opinion, is a husband justified in hitting or beating his wife in the following situations: if she goes out without telling him?
Personal Attribute Questionnaire (PAQ) Personal adherence to gender roles Gage EA. Gender attitudes and sexual behaviors: Comparing center and marginal athletes and nonathletes in a collegiate setting. Violence Against Women. 2008; 14(2): 1014-1032. North America USA Male Can't tell Measure Individual 24 Partial Contraception nr NR Mean age: 21.95 for nonathlete, 20.35 for marginal sport, 20.18 for center sport 3 Masculinity (M); Femininity (F); Masuclinity-Femininity (M-F) 5-point scale ranging from 0 to 4 (indicating highest identification with femininity for F scale and masculinity for the M and M-F scales) NA NA NA Masculinity: "Not at all independent, Very independent"; Femininity: "Not at all emotional, Very emotional"; Masculinity-Femininity: "Not at all aggressive, Very aggressive"
Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) Personal adherence to gender roles Ingersoll TS, Norvilitis JM, Zhang J, Jia S, and Tetewsky S. Reliability and validity of the fear of intimacy scale in China. J PERS ASSESS. 2008; 90(3): 270-279. Central Asia, North America USA, China Male, Female Adults only (18+) Develop/ validate Individual 40 No questions NA NR 55% Chinese; 45% American (American sample: 78% Euro-American, 13% African American, 1% Native American, 2% Other) 18 and older; median age: 22 years NR NR 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never or almost never true) to 7 (always or almost always true) American sample: Masculine subscale r=0.81, Feminine subscale r=0.88; Chinese sample: Masculine subscale r=0.77, Feminine subscale r=0.69 NA Results suggests the factor structure was similar between cultures, with confirmatory factor analysis identifying a three-factor model in both samples. As evidence of convergent validity, the scale was positively correlated with depression and negatively correlated with social support and self-esteem. NR
Gender Equitable Men Scale (GEM) Views on gender roles in general Fulu, E.F. et al., Prevalence of and factors associated with male perpetration of intimate partner violence: findings from the UN Multi-country Cross-sectional Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific. Lancet Global Health, 2013; 1:e187-207. Southeast Asia Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Papua New Guinea Female Adults only (18+) Measure General 10 Full IPV perpetration nr NR 18 to 49 NR NR Low equity vs. high/moderate equitable attitudes NR Cronbach's alpha: 0.72 NR "If a woman doesn't physically fight back, its not rape"
Controlling Behavior Relationship power/ control Fulu E, Warner X, Miedema S, Jewkes R, Roselli T, Lang J: Why do some men use violence against women and how can we prevent it. Bangkok: UNDP, UNFPA, UN Women, UNV; 2013. Southeast Asia Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Papua New Guinea Female Adults only (18+) Measure Individual 8 Full IPV perpetration nr NR 18 to 49 NR NR High/moderate controlling vs. low control (ref) NR Cronbach's alpha: 0.69 NR "When I want sex I expect my partner to agree"
Attitudes Towards IPV Measure Acceptance of IPV Davas Aksan HA and Aksu F. The training needs of Turkish emergency department personnel regarding intimate partner violence. BMC Public Health. 2007; 7(1): 350-359. Europe, Central Asia Turkey Male, Female Adults only (18+) Measure General 14 Partial NA Urban NR 21 to 50 NR NR Likert scale ranging from 1 (disagree) to 3 (agree) NA Cronbach's alpha: 0.905 NA Women deserve physical punishment under these situations: Lying to husband; Talking too much; Deceiving husband
Attitudes Towards Women Scale (AWS) Views on gender roles in general Delevi R and Bugay A. Assessing reliability and validity of the 15-item short version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) among Turkish students. J Int Womens Stud. 2013; 13(1): 263-272. Europe, Central Asia Turkey Male, Female Adults only (18+) Develop/ validate General 12 Partial NA NR NR 18 to 26 NR NR 4-point Likert type scale (value not indicated) NA Cronbach's alpha: 0.81 Factor analysis supported the uni-dimensionality of the scale, consistent with results from the original AWS. The criterion validity of the AWS was assessed against the short-form Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) (which assesses feminine and androgynous personality styles) [Turkish version]. Pearson correlation tests revealed that participants with a high AWS score were more likely to score lower on the masculinity subscale of BSRI. In contrast, participants with a high AWS score also scored higher on the femininity subscale of BSRI. "Swearing and obscenity are more repulsive in the speech of a woman than a man"; "Under modern economic conditions with women being active outside the home, men should stare in household tasks such as washing dishes and doing laundry"; "Women should worry less about their rights and more about becoming good wives and mothers"
Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) Personal adherence to gender roles Delevi R and Bugay A. Assessing reliability and validity of the 15-item short version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) among Turkish students. J Int Womens Stud. 2013; 13(1): 263-272. Europe, Central Asia Turkey Male, Female Adults only (18+) Develop/ validate General 30 Partial NA NR NR 18 to 26 3 Masculinity; Femininity; Neutral 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1=almost never true to 7=almost always true NA NA Pearson correlation tests revealed that participants with a high AWS score were more likely to score lower on the masculinity subscale of BSRI. In contrast, participants with a high AWS score also scored higher on the femininity subscale of BSRI. Masculine scale traits: e.g., "assertive, strong personality, and dominant"; Feminine scale traits e.g.," emotional, sympathetic and understanding" ; Neutral traits e.g., "conscientious, unpredictable, and reliable"
Hyperfemininity Scale (HS) Views on gender roles in general Dixon D, Saul J, and Peters M. Psychosocial correlates of HIV sexual protective behavior among Puerto Rican women residing in the Bronx, New York. Health Care Women Int. 2010; 31(3): 274-293. North America USA Female Adults only (18+) Measure General 32 Partial Condom Urban Puerto Rican 100% 18 to 35 NR NR 7-point scale ranging from 1 (disagree strongly) to 7 (agree strongly) NA Cronbach's alpha: 0.72 NA "Men should always be ready to accept the financial responsibility for a date"; "Women who are good at sports probably turn men off"; "Sometimes women have to compete with one another for men"

We want to hear from you – let us know of any errors or submit your validation or measurement study for inclusion. Email Us.

  • About
  • Index of Scales
  • Appendix
USAID

The Evidence Project is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the terms of cooperative agreement no. AID-OAA-A-13-00087. The contents of this web site are the sole responsibility of the Evidence Project and Population Council and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

Evidence Project

The Evidence Project seeks to expand access to high quality family planning/reproductive health services worldwide through implementation science, including the strategic generation, translation, and use of new and existing evidence. The project is led by the Population Council.

This website is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of the Population Council and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

© 2019 The Population Council, Inc.

Dynamic title for modals

Are you sure?

Please confirm deletion. There is no undo!