| Literature DB >> 31920871 |
Abstract
This study evaluated the psychometric properties of a Chinese form of the Feminist Identity Composite (FIC). A total of 2,334 Chinese adult women completed the scale for this study. In study 1 (n = 875), exploratory analysis indicated six factors, Passive Acceptance, Revelation, Embeddedness/Emanation, Active Commitment, and Synthesis, the latter of which was divided into two subscales (Femininity Synthesis and Autonomous Synthesis). In study 2 (n = 810), confirmatory factor analysis was conducted with a different sample to examine the construct validity of the model obtained in study 1. In study 3 (n = 649), the convergent validity of the FIC was examined via their relationship with willingness to engage in feminist behaviors and attitude toward trans-people. The results indicated that a new measurement with solid conceptual and psychometrically solid properties needs to be developed to assess Chinese women's feminist identity.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese women; feminist identity; genderism; reliability; validity
Year: 2019 PMID: 31920871 PMCID: PMC6932982 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02842
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
The Cronbach’s α of five subscales and the demographic information of participants in the previous studies.
| 191 | 18 to 34 | 19.4 ± 2.4 | 90%White | 0.75 | 0.80 | 0.84 | 0.68 | 0.77 | |
| 240 | 16 to 67 | 30.2 ± 12.7 | 79%White | 0.74 | 0.76 | 0.84 | 0.73 | 0.77 | |
| 227 | 18 to 72 | 38.3 ± 11.3 | 85%White | 0.67 | 0.6 | 0.78 | 0.48 | 0.81 | |
| 191 | — | 19.4 ± 2.4 | 90%White | 0.74 | 0.75 | 0.86 | 0.71 | 0.81 | |
| 256 | 17 to 48 | 19.8 ± 4.2 | 77%White | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.91 | 0.75 | 0.72 | |
| 691 | 18 to 83 | 40.0 | 89%White | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.90 | 0.68 | 0.85 | |
| 125 | 18 to 61 | 19 ± 6.1 | 79%White | 0.71 to 0.81 | 0.60 to 0.78 | 0.80 to 0.87 | 0.66 to 0.77 | 0.79 to 0.89 | |
| 103 | 19 to 48 | 21.0 ± 4.6 | 89%White | ||||||
| 165 | 18 to 63 | 19.0 ± 7.0 | 73%White | 0.76 | 0.78 | 0.79 | 0.65 | 0.79 | |
| 276 | — | 20.6 ± 3.4 | 70%White | 0.78 | 0.83 | 0.76 | 0.72 | 0.79 | |
| 100 | 18 to 30 | — | African | 0.62 | 0.76 | 0.75 | 0.83 | 0.78 | |
| 220 | 18 to 39 | 18.5 ± 2.3 | 85%White | 0.68 | 0.86 | 0.85 | 0.76 | 0.83 | |
| 183 | 18 to 22 | 18.9 ± 0.9 | 81%White | 0.75 | 0.79 | 0.87 | 0.71 | 0.83 | |
| 255 | 18 to 39 | 19.0 ± 2.4 | 85%White | 0.74 | 0.86 | 0.85 | 0.76 | 0.83 | |
| 326 | 18 to 30 | 23.1 ± 3.0 | 86%White | 0.73 | 0.64 | 0.72 | 0.62 | 0.80 | |
| 273 | 20 to 65 | 35.4 ± 11.2 | Polish | 0.88 | 0.93 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 0.83 | |
| 544 | 18 to 78 | 35.0 ± 14.5 | 72%White | 0.72 | 0.71/0.73 | 0.86 | 0.77 | 0.86 | |
| 235 | — | — | 80%White | 0.74 | 0.74 | 0.88 | 0.60 | 0.87 |
Exploratory factor analysis six-factor solution of the feminist identity composite.
| AC4 | 0.137 | –0.038 | 0.068 | 0.035 | –0.124 | 0.43 | 0.67*** | |
| AC2 | –0.151 | 0.002 | –0.068 | –0.062 | –0.014 | 0.28 | 0.56*** | |
| AC3 | 0.017 | 0.018 | 0.037 | 0.037 | –0.085 | 0.29 | 0.62*** | |
| AC6 | –0.028 | –0.044 | –0.008 | 0.006 | 0.051 | 0.25 | 0.59*** | |
| AC7 | –0.047 | –0.026 | 0.071 | –0.109 | 0.211 | 0.27 | 0.55*** | |
| AC9 | 0.010 | 0.004 | 0.090 | 0.172 | –0.072 | 0.25 | 0.58*** | |
| AC5 | 0.060 | 0.059 | –0.071 | 0.012 | 0.104 | 0.30 | 0.57*** | |
| AC1 | 0.048 | 0.045 | –0.066 | –0.045 | 0.191 | 0.31 | 0.60*** | |
| REV6 | –0.007 | 0.018 | –0.106 | 0.049 | –0.026 | 0.49 | 0.71*** | |
| REV5 | –0.005 | 0.003 | 0.056 | –0.056 | 0.117 | 0.36 | 0.65*** | |
| REV7 | 0.112 | –0.007 | –0.050 | 0.024 | –0.096 | 0.34 | 0.64*** | |
| REV1 | –0.054 | –0.021 | 0.075 | –0.032 | 0.008 | 0.24 | 0.59*** | |
| REV2 | 0.031 | 0.039 | –0.071 | –0.081 | –0.058 | 0.25 | 0.60*** | |
| REV8 | –0.131 | 0.008 | –0.038 | 0.151 | –0.035 | 0.22 | 0.56*** | |
| REV4 | 0.026 | –0.009 | 0.146 | –0.137 | 0.056 | 0.21 | 0.54*** | |
| EE3 | –0.024 | –0.071 | 0.003 | 0.014 | –0.037 | 0.73 | 0.85*** | |
| EE1 | 0.053 | 0.024 | 0.090 | –0.074 | 0.049 | 0.56 | 0.81*** | |
| EE2 | –0.057 | 0.064 | 0.011 | 0.017 | –0.074 | 0.50 | 0.79*** | |
| EE4 | 0.121 | 0.043 | –0.177 | 0.106 | 0.092 | 0.30 | 0.64*** | |
| PA2 | –0.106 | 0.107 | 0.002 | 0.001 | –0.057 | 0.39 | 0.64∗∗ | |
| PA4 | 0.075 | –0.020 | –0.025 | –0.053 | –0.087 | 0.34 | 0.65*** | |
| PA6 | 0.045 | 0.015 | 0.013 | –0.013 | 0.011 | 0.29 | 0.63*** | |
| PA5 | –0.084 | 0.026 | 0.052 | 0.036 | 0.216 | 0.26 | 0.61*** | |
| PA1 | –0.018 | 0.032 | –0.030 | 0.086 | –0.040 | 0.24 | 0.62*** | |
| PA7 | 0.095 | –0.154 | 0.078 | 0.060 | –0.022 | 0.24 | 0.60*** | |
| SYN1 | –0.059 | –0.008 | 0.020 | 0.019 | 0.042 | 0.63 | 0.87*** | |
| SYN2 | 0.089 | –0.064 | –0.034 | 0.056 | 0.061 | 0.43 | 0.87*** | |
| SYN3 | 0.081 | –0.066 | –0.008 | –0.019 | 0.040 | 0.29 | 0.73*** | |
| SYN4 | 0.117 | 0.111 | –0.086 | 0.002 | 0.172 | 0.25 | 0.86*** | |
| Eigenvalues | 4.55 | 2.55 | 2.30 | 1.85 | 1.33 | 1.07 | ||
| % of Variance | 13.55 | 6.39 | 5.63 | 4.76 | 2.64 | 1.24 | ||
FIGURE 1The hypothetical correlated six-factor model.
FIGURE 2The hypothetical five-factor, second-order model.
The correlation between subscales and item-total correlations.
| PA | (0.67) | 2.72 | 0.70 | 0.56*** to 0.69*** | |||||
| REV | 0.04 | (0.71) | 2.54 | 0.70 | 0.53*** to 0.68*** | ||||
| EE | –0.04 | 0.17** | (0.79) | 3.55 | 0.83 | 0.37*** to 0.77*** | |||
| f-SYN | 0.11** | 0.08* | 0.31*** | (0.49***) | 3.54 | 0.80 | 0.49*** to 0.86*** | ||
| a-SYN | –0.22*** | 0.05 | 0.25*** | 0.24*** | (0.32***) | 4.19 | 0.70 | 0.75*** to 0.87*** | |
| AC | –0.14*** | 0.19*** | 0.40*** | 0.33*** | 0.38*** | (0.75) | 3.78 | 0.56 | 0.55*** to 0.66*** |
Descriptive and bivariate correlations for the total sample.
| PA | (0.68) | 2.66 | 0.68 | |||||||||||
| REV | 0.03 | (0.75) | 2.42 | 0.69 | ||||||||||
| EE | –0.01 | 0.24*** | (0.81) | 3.63 | 0.80 | |||||||||
| f-SYN | 0.16*** | 0.06 | 0.22*** | (0.56***) | 3.59 | 0.82 | ||||||||
| a-SYN | –0.15*** | 0.10* | 0.25*** | 0.38*** | (0.27***) | 4.12 | 0.69 | |||||||
| AC | –0.14*** | 0.25*** | 0.38*** | 0.31*** | 0.37*** | (0.73) | 3.75 | 0.54 | ||||||
| WEFB | –0.15*** | 0.24*** | 0.30*** | 0.14*** | 0.24*** | 0.53*** | (0.88) | 4.35 | 0.78 | |||||
| ASP | –0.40*** | 0.08* | 0.04 | –0.11** | 0.09* | 0.09* | 0.16*** | (0.87) | 4.16 | 1.31 | ||||
| ATV | –0.28*** | –0.11** | –0.04 | –0.14*** | –0.03 | –0.03 | –0.02 | 0.62*** | (0.77) | 5.63 | 0.99 | |||
| ATP | –0.41*** | –0.06 | –0.07 | –0.14*** | 0.10* | 0.03 | 0.09* | 0.64*** | 0.62*** | (0.82) | 5.64 | 1.14 | ||
| GF | –0.38*** | 0.03 | –0.03 | –0.13*** | 0.10* | 0.14** | 0.13** | 0.65*** | 0.49*** | 0.60*** | (0.63) | 4.93 | 1.05 | |
| TU | –0.41*** | 0.05 | –0.00 | –0.17*** | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.66*** | 0.42*** | 0.50*** | 0.56*** | (0.84) | 4.20 | 1.86 |