Evaluating the Validity and Reliability of the Gender Equitable Men’s Scale Using a Longitudinal Cohort of Adolescent Girls and Young Women in South Africa.
Outcomes: Gender‑Based Violence, Sexual and Reproductive Health
View SourceKey Social Norms Take-aways
This study highlights the importance of critically assessing how gender norms are measured across time and developmental stages. While the Gender Equitable Men’s Scale (GEMS) performs well overall in tracking changes in beliefs among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW), individual items within the scale exhibit bias depending on life experiences such as sexual debut, pregnancy, or exposure to intimate partner violence. This underscores the need for adolescent-specific items and caution when interpreting individual item responses. It also reveals that normative beliefs evolve through adolescence and young adulthood, requiring sensitive and longitudinally validated tools to capture shifting social norms.
Objectives
To evaluate the longitudinal validity and reliability of the GEMS instrument when used among a cohort of AGYW in South Africa, and to assess how life events such as sexual activity, pregnancy, and IPV affect responses to individual items on the scale.
Methods
Data were drawn from the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 068, a longitudinal randomized trial in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa, following 2,533 AGYW over a five-year period. The 13-item GEMS instrument was administered at multiple timepoints. Item Response Theory (IRT), Differential Item Functioning (DIF), and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) were used to evaluate the scale’s psychometric properties and measurement invariance over time. The study explored item difficulty, internal consistency, and the impact of demographic and experiential factors on item endorsement.
Results
The GEMS instrument demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.77) and longitudinal measurement invariance, confirming it reliably measures gender equitable beliefs over time. However, 9 of 13 items exhibited differential functioning across subgroups, particularly based on IPV exposure and pregnancy history. Normative beliefs shifted significantly, with overall increased endorsement of gender equity as participants aged. Some items (e.g., views on male sexual entitlement or traditional gender roles) were more sensitive to age and experience, while others showed stability. Despite the scale’s overall reliability, interpretation of individual items without accounting for contextual factors could introduce bias.
Conclusions
GEMS is a valid and reliable tool for measuring gender equitable beliefs over time among AGYW, but item-level biases linked to life experiences highlight the need for tailored instruments in adolescent populations. Programs and research using social norms measures should avoid assuming uniform item functioning across diverse youth experiences and should consider adapting or augmenting tools like GEMS with adolescent-specific content.
Disclaimer: These summaries were generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence and are based on the interpretation of source documents. While efforts have been made to ensure accuracy and clarity, there may be errors or omissions. Users are encouraged to consult the original documents for complete and authoritative information.