PlayInfoBox

Home /Personality /The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI): All 4 Types Explained

The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI): All 4 Types Explained

Are masculinity and femininity opposite ends of the same scale, or two separate things a person can have more or less of? Sandra Bem's 1974 inventory argued for the latter β€” here are the four resulting types.

Masculine

Scores high on traits traditionally categorized as masculine and low on traits traditionally categorized as feminine. American psychologist Sandra Bem's 1974 Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) broke from the older approach of treating masculinity and femininity as two ends of a single scale, instead measuring them as two independent dimensions. The masculine type scores highly on traits like assertiveness, independence, and leadership that were traditionally coded as masculine.

Feminine

Scores high on traits traditionally categorized as feminine and low on traits traditionally categorized as masculine. The feminine type scores highly on traits like warmth, empathy, and nurturance traditionally coded as feminine. Because the BSRI built its trait list around 1970s American social norms, some of those categorizations may look dated by today's standards.

Androgynous

Scores evenly high on both masculine and feminine traits. Bem proposed that the androgynous type might be more psychologically flexible and adaptable, capable of being assertive when assertiveness is called for and warm when warmth is called for. This was a notable challenge to the binary gender-role assumptions common at the time.

Undifferentiated

Scores low on both masculine and feminine traits. This type scores below average on both sets of trait items, which some interpretations suggest may reflect a mismatch between the specific trait list used in the test and how the respondent actually sees themselves.

Why Bem split masculinity and femininity into two scales

Before the BSRI, most personality measures treated masculinity and femininity as a single bipolar scale, where being more masculine automatically meant being less feminine, and vice versa. Bem argued this forced a false choice, since real people routinely display both assertive and nurturing qualities depending on the situation β€” measuring the two traits independently made it possible to identify people who score high, low, or evenly on each.

How the theory has aged, and what it does and doesn't measure

The specific trait items on the BSRI reflect 1970s American assumptions about what counts as 'masculine' or 'feminine,' which limits how directly the exact scoring translates across cultures and eras. What has held up better is the theory's core structural insight β€” that traits stereotypically associated with each gender can be measured and combined independently β€” which continues to influence how personality and gender-role research is designed today.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does scoring 'masculine' or 'feminine' on the BSRI mean something about a person's actual gender identity?

No β€” the BSRI measures self-reported personality traits that were, at the time, stereotypically associated with each gender, not gender identity itself. A person of any gender can score as masculine, feminine, androgynous, or undifferentiated on the inventory.

Is the androgynous type considered the 'best' outcome?

Bem's own research suggested androgynous individuals showed more behavioral flexibility across situations, but this doesn't mean the other three types are inherently worse β€” the framework describes different trait patterns rather than ranking them, and later researchers have debated how much psychological advantage androgyny genuinely provides.