Department of Education and Counseling Psychology, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA.
J Couns Psychol. 2012 Jan;59(1):176-83. doi: 10.1037/a0026206.
How are specific dimensions of masculinity related to psychological distress in specific groups of men? To address this question, the authors used latent class regression to assess the optimal number of latent classes that explained differential relationships between conformity to masculine norms and psychological distress in a racially diverse sample of 223 men. The authors identified a 2-class solution. Both latent classes demonstrated very different associations between conformity to masculine norms and psychological distress. In Class 1 (labeled risk avoiders; n = 133), conformity to the masculine norm of risk-taking was negatively related to psychological distress. In Class 2 (labeled detached risk-takers; n = 90), conformity to the masculine norms of playboy, self-reliance, and risk-taking was positively related to psychological distress, whereas conformity to the masculine norm of violence was negatively related to psychological distress. A post hoc analysis revealed that younger men and Asian American men (compared with Latino and White American men) had significantly greater odds of being in Class 2 versus Class 1. The implications of these findings for future research and clinical practice are examined.
特定的男性气质维度与特定男性群体的心理困扰有何关系？为了解决这个问题，作者使用潜在类别回归来评估在一个种族多样化的 223 名男性样本中，男性规范一致性与心理困扰之间的最佳潜在类别数量，以解释不同的关系。作者确定了 2 个类别解决方案。这两个潜在类别在男性规范一致性和心理困扰之间表现出非常不同的关联。在第 1 类（称为风险回避者；n = 133）中，冒险的男性规范一致性与心理困扰呈负相关。在第 2 类（称为冷漠的冒险者；n = 90）中，花花公子、自力更生和冒险的男性规范一致性与心理困扰呈正相关，而暴力的男性规范一致性与心理困扰呈负相关。事后分析表明，年轻男性和亚裔美国男性（与拉丁裔和美国白人男性相比）更有可能属于第 2 类而不是第 1 类。这些发现对未来的研究和临床实践的意义进行了探讨。
