ArticleBMC psychology2025
Development and validation of the Women Autonomy Scale for measuring psychosocial freedom from conventional gender roles.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Atimiaphobia: The Undiscovered Burden of Honor Cultures and Shame Societies on Mental Health-Development and Validation of Atimiaphobia Scale.PsyCh journal · 2026Article
- Development of a questionnaire to better understand verbal violence among college students: preliminary results from a cluster random sample.BMC psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe concepts of masculinity and femininity have historically shaped gender roles, leading to inequality and gender-based discrimination. Women's autonomy, defined as the ability to make independent choices across various life domains, remains inadequately measured by existing scales. This study addresses this gap by developing and validating the Women Autonomy Scale (WAS).
methodsThe development and validation of the WAS involved four phases with a total of 2,252 adult women from Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Pakistan. These phases included exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and assessments of convergent and discriminant validity by using the Psychosocial Life Satisfaction Scale and the Dependent Personality Disorder sub-scale of the Personality Disorders Questionnaire.
resultsThe WAS demonstrated high reliability across the four phases (α = 0.810 to 0.857). Test-retest reliability was 0.788 after two weeks of initial administration. EFA revealed a four-factor structure consisting of 18 items: personal freedom, freedom from conventional femininity, freedom from conventional masculinity, and freedom from shame. CFA confirmed this structure, showing good fit indices (CFI = 0.951, RMSEA = 0.052). The scale's convergent validity was established through a significant positive correlation with the Psychosocial Life Satisfaction Scale (r = 0.394, p < 0.01), and discriminant validity was confirmed via a significant inverse correlation with the Dependent Personality Disorder sub-scale (r = -0.255, p < 0.01).
conclusionThe WAS is a reliable and valid instrument for comprehensively assessing women's autonomy. It addresses limitations of previous measures and provides a robust tool for research and policymaking aimed at promoting gender equality and women's empowerment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.