Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42381051›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2026

Psychometric evaluation of gender norm beliefs and attitudes among students in Ghana: evidence from the GNAS and GEM Scales.

Bright Addo, Kofi Osei Akuoko, Peter Dwumah, Jonathan Mensah Dapaah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Bright AddoDepartment of Sociology and Social Work, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana. addobright1@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8465-4671
Kofi Osei AkuokoDepartment of Sociology and Social Work, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.
Peter DwumahDepartment of Sociology and Social Work, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.
Jonathan Mensah DapaahDepartment of Sociology and Social Work, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobust measurement of gender-related beliefs and attitudes is essential for understanding how gender norms operate in higher-education settings. However, little is known about how these constructs are structured among Ghanaian university students or whether widely used instruments retain validity in this context. This study examined the factor structure, reliability, and measurement invariance of adapted versions of the Gender Norm Attitudes Scale (GNAS) and Gender Equitable Men (GEM) Scale among Sociology and Social Work students in Ghana.

methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among 631 students (98.3% response rate) from two public universities, split for Explorative Factor Analysis (EFA) (n = 339) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) (n = 364). EFA used principal axis factoring with oblique rotation on polychoric correlation matrices; parallel analysis guided factor retention. CFA was estimated under maximum likelihood and WLSMV estimators. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega. Measurement invariance was tested across sex, university, programme, and year level using the standard nested sequence of configural, metric, and scalar models, and was evaluated by changes in fit indices (ΔCFI, ΔRMSEA, ΔTLI, and ΔSRMR); differential item functioning (DIF) was assessed using ordinal logistic regression. Data were managed and described using SPSS Version 32; all factor-analytic, reliability, invariance, and DIF analyses were conducted in R (psych and lavaan packages).

resultsThe GNAS yielded a two-factor, 11-item structure reflecting beliefs supporting men's privileges (α = 0.824, ω = 0.868) and equity for girls and women (α = 0.830, ω = 0.898), with strong fit (CFI = 0.960; TLI = 0.949; RMSEA = 0.057). Polychoric EFA confirmed this, indicating ordinal estimation did not alter the solution. After empirically driven item reduction, the adapted GEM Scale emerged as a modified version of the original instrument, with narrower domain coverage and near-complete loss of the Reproductive Health and Disease Prevention domain; the retained 16-item, four-factor structure covered violence, domestic chores and daily life, sexual relationships, and household authority and obedience, explaining 52.6% of variance with acceptable fit (CFI = 0.888; TLI = 0.865; RMSEA = 0.058), though the Household Authority and Obedience factor rested on only two items and the subscales showing weak Cronbach's alpha values. The students generally rejected inequitable norms, though attitudes toward household authority and domestic roles were more variable. For the GNAS, configural and metric invariance held across sex and university (ΔCFI ≤ 0.005); scalar invariance held across university (ΔCFI = 0.006) and was only partial across sex (ΔCFI = 0.022). For the adapted GEM Scale, metric invariance held across university (ΔCFI = 0.006) but not sex (ΔCFI = 0.016), and scalar invariance was not supported in either grouping.

conclusionAlthough preliminary, the adapted GNAS shows acceptable structural validity, adequate-to-strong reliability, and metric invariance across sex and university and scalar invariance across university. In contrast, the adapted GEM Scale should be interpreted cautiously as a substantially modified measure with reduced domain coverage and less stable invariance properties, for which scalar invariance is not yet established. Further validation, confirmation of these invariance results using ordinal (WLSMV) estimators, and exploration of 5- or 7-point response formats are needed before either adapted scale is used confidently in broader research or programme evaluation.

Indexed as

AttitudePsychometricsStudentsAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleGhanaHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUniversitiesYoung AdultFactor analysisGEM scaleGender normsGhanaGNASHigher educationPsychometric evaluation

Identifiers

PMID42381051
PMCPMC13587401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.