Preliminary Validation of Two Brief Measures of Masculine and Feminine Honor Endorsement.

Researchers have developed numerous individual differences measures to assess people's endorsement of honor ideology (i.e., beliefs regarding the importance of honor and reputation) with most ranging from 12-36 items in length. Despite having great utility, the length of these measures magnifies the costs associated with survey research, especially in research contexts that use large, representative samples (e.g., health surveys). The present study aimed to develop and validate single-item measures that assess participants' agreement with gender-specific honor prototypes, as well as short-form versions of the honor ideology for manhood (HIM) and honor ideology for womanhood (HIW) scales. An initial sample of participants (N = 879) completed single-item honor prototype measures, a battery of previously validated honor measures (including the HIM and HIW), and measures of constructs previously shown to be related to the dynamics of honor (e.g., aggression, firearm ownership). A second sample of participants (N = 100) completed the new measures, as well as an abbreviated battery of honor measures, to examine test-retest reliability. Results indicated that the new, brief measures were strongly correlated with both the original HIM and HIW as well as several other established honor measures. Moreover, the associations between these new measures and honor-related outcomes were nearly identical to those found with the original HIM and HIW. Our new measures also demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability, despite being single-item scales. Overall, the present work provides preliminary support for several brief measures of honor endorsement that researchers can use when longer scales are not feasible.

Invincible honor: masculine honor, perceived invulnerability, and risky decision-making.

Masculine honor ideology is characterized by the cultivation, maintenance, and defense of reputations for toughness, bravery, and strength. The link between masculine honor endorsement and increased risk-taking - especially an increased tolerance for and even expectation of violence - is well-established in the literature. However, little empirical research has examined what factors might explain this relationship. This study investigates perceived invulnerability, the cognitive bias that one is immune to threats, as a mediator in the relationship between masculine honor ideology and risky decision-making. Results show moderate support for this relationship's existence. These findings elaborate on previous research between honor and specific risky decisions by demonstrating honor to instill cognitive biases in its adherents that make them more tolerant of risk, and thus more likely to decide to engage in risky behaviors. The implications of these findings for interpreting previous research, guiding future research, and pursuing specific educational and policy-based efforts are discussed.