Male rape myths: Measurement and relation to the gender role strain paradigm

The purpose of this research was to revise the Male Rape Myths Scale (MRMS; Kerr Melanson, 1999) and gather psychometric information using the gender role strain paradigm (GRSP; Pleck, 1991, 1995) as a theoretical framework in samples of U.S. undergraduate students. I provided evidence for a 16-item revised version of the MRMS (MRMS-R) across three studies. The MRMS items were first revised based on the results of a pilot study and expert reviews. Exploratory factor analyses revealed a correlated two-factor model: (1) Marginalization and Homophobia and (2) Victim Blame and Denial of Trauma. Results of the confirmatory factor analyses provided support for bifactor and correlated two-factor models of the MRMS-R. Criterion validity was supported based on (a) differences in MRMS-R scores between men and women and (b) lower scores for participants who reported experiencing a sexual assault. MRMS-R scores were also correlated with victim blaming responses to case vignettes and female rape myth acceptance in the expected directions. Construct validity was further demonstrated by correlations between MRMS-R scores and measures of traditional gender role attitudes, homonegativity toward gay men, and patriarchal beliefs. Further, the bifactor model met criteria for measurement invariance between male and female groups. The total and subscale scores had high internal consistency estimates of reliability. Results provided preliminary support for the use of the MRMS-R as an updated measure of male rape myth agreement among college student populations, and clarified links to other gender-related constructs. Limitations, implications, and recommendations for future research are also discussed