Masculine depression: A person-centric perspective

The construct of masculine depression is believed to be evident when men express their depressive symptomology via externalizing problems (e.g., anger, substance use, and compulsive overworking) rather than or in addition to traditional, internalizing expression of depression (e.g., sadness, hopelessness, and feeling helpless). We examined whether distinct subgroups of men potentially at risk for depression could be identified based on their self-reported levels of internalizing and externalizing depressive symptomology. Latent profile analysis (LPA) using traditional (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]) and masculine (Masculine Depression Scale [MDS]) self-report measures of depression in an online sample of 910 male Mechanical Turk (MTurk) workers in the United States revealed support for a four-class solution: Low Internalizing–Low Externalizing (LI–LE; n = 519), High Internalizing–Moderate Externalizing (HI–ME; n = 68), High Internalizing–High Externalizing (HI–HE; n = 120), and Moderate Internalizing–Moderate Externalizing (MI–ME; n = 209). The LPA indicators and responses to auxiliary measures of traditional masculinity ideology, conformity to masculine role norms, and male depression risk suggested the HI–HE class best represented a masculine depression subtype, whereas the HI–ME class best represented a traditional expression of depression. Consistent with expectations, men in the HI–HE class reported the greatest levels of traditional masculinity ideology and higher levels of male depression risk. However, men in this class reported lower conformity to emotional control and self-reliance masculine norms than men in the HI–ME class. These results highlight the importance of a person-centric perspective of masculine depression but raise questions regarding the conceptualization of the construct in relation to traditional masculine role norms