The Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale (MFSDS)

Abstract

The Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale (MFSDS) is a psychometric instrument developed by William E. Snell, Jr., Sharyn S. Belk, and Raymond C. Hawkins II in 1986 to evaluate individuals’ willingness to reveal gender-stereotyped content to specific interpersonal targets. While traditional measures of self-disclosure treated the construct as a unidimensional, quantitative volume of personal revelation, the MFSDS operationalizes disclosure through the multidimensional lens of gender role orientation and social presentation politics. The 42-item self-report questionnaire assesses four core primary subscales: Masculine Trait Disclosure (7 items), Masculine Behavior Disclosure (7 items), Feminine Trait Disclosure (7 items), and Feminine Behavior Disclosure (7 items), alongside two single-item global indicators (Global Masculinity and Global Femininity) and selected neutral filler items. Respondents evaluate their willingness to discuss each topic on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (Not at all willing to discuss this topic with…) to 4 (Totally willing to discuss this topic with…), referenced against designated relational targets such as female friends, male friends, spouses, or psychotherapists. Extensive psychometric evaluations demonstrate solid internal consistency reliability across subscales (Cronbach’s alphas typically between .75 and .89), stable test-retest reliability, and robust convergent and discriminant validity with established measures of instrumentality, expressiveness, social anxiety, and interpersonal intimacy. This article provides a comprehensive academic analysis of the MFSDS, delineating its historical emergence, theoretical architecture, statistical properties, clinical utility, scoring protocols, and complete authenticated instrument items.

Keywords

Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale, MFSDS, self-disclosure, gender roles, masculinity, femininity, instrumentality, expressiveness, interpersonal communication, psychometrics, William E. Snell Jr.

Authors

The MFSDS was conceptualized, operationalized, and psychometrically validated by a collaborative team of researchers in social and personality psychology:

• William E. Snell, Jr., Ph.D. — Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau, Missouri. Dr. Snell is renowned for his empirical investigations into interpersonal communication, human sexuality, masculine role socialization, and social interaction dynamics.
• Sharyn S. Belk, Ph.D. — Researcher in clinical and counseling psychology, focusing on relational disclosure processes, gender-typed interaction patterns, and therapeutic alliance formation.
• Raymond C. Hawkins II, Ph.D., ABPP — Clinical psychologist and faculty member affiliated with the University of Texas at Austin and Fielding Graduate University, specializing in clinical assessment, behavioral health, and addictive behaviors.

Purpose

The fundamental purpose of the Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale is to measure the qualitative, gender-salient dimensions of interpersonal self-revelation. Prior to the development of the MFSDS in the mid-1980s, psychological research into interpersonal communication heavily relied on omnibus self-disclosure measures—such as Sidney Jourard’s Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (JSDQ)—which primarily quantified the breadth and depth of disclosure across generalized informational domains (e.g., attitudes, tastes, work, body, money, and personality) without accounting for the sociocultural and gendered nature of the disclosed content.

Snell, Belk, and Hawkins recognized that disclosing one’s vulnerabilities, communal affections, emotional dependencies, or nurturing orientations is fundamentally distinct from revealing autonomous achievements, competitive drives, agentic competencies, or authoritative leadership experiences. Society imposes divergent normative pressures on individuals regarding what content is socially sanctioned for public or private disclosure. Consequently, measuring disclosure volume without indexing the gendered valence of the topic creates significant blind spots in understanding human relationships, marital dyads, counseling dynamics, and social adaptation.

The MFSDS addresses these limitations by serving several distinct research and clinical purposes:

• Deconstructing Disclosure by Valence and Modality: The instrument disentangles self-ascriptions of internal personality dispositions (traits) from concrete overt actions (behaviors), allowing investigators to determine whether individuals are more comfortable discussing what they do versus what they are within gender-typed domains.
• Target-Specific Assessment: Communication is inherently relational. The MFSDS is structured to assess disclosure willingness toward differentiated social targets—most notably male friends versus female friends, romantic partners, or psychological clinicians—enabling the examination of target-gender moderating effects.
• Investigating Gender Role Strain and Impression Management: The scale enables researchers to evaluate the “politics of self-presentation,” investigating how men and women strategically disclose or suppress masculine versus feminine facets of the self to preserve social power, assert agency, or foster communal warmth.
• Clinical and Counseling Diagnostic Utility: In therapeutic environments, the MFSDS helps therapists identify client communication blockages. For instance, it can illuminate an individual’s inability to discuss emotional fragility or interpersonal affection (restricted feminine disclosure) or their inhibitions surrounding ambition and self-advocacy (restricted masculine disclosure).

Psychological Construct

The psychological construct measured by the MFSDS is multidimensional, rooted in the structural distinction between agentic (masculine) and communal (feminine) self-presentation, bifurcated into trait-based and behavior-based modes of communication.

1. Masculine Trait Self-Disclosure

This dimension assesses an individual’s willingness to reveal enduring internal personality characteristics traditionally associated with psychological instrumentality, agency, and independence. Rather than reporting external actions, the respondent indicates their willingness to share the degree to which they perceive themselves as possessing masculine-typed internal dispositions. Core topics within this subscale include disclosing one’s self-sufficiency, autonomy, independence, assertiveness, self-reliance, persistence, and efficiency. Communicating these traits requires exposing one’s internal self-concept regarding personal competence, stoicism, and emotional fortitude.

2. Masculine Behavior Self-Disclosure

In contrast to static self-perceptions, this construct reflects an individual’s readiness to discuss overt, agentic, and instrumental actions performed in the social world. It captures communication about behaviors involving active intervention, verbal defense, and leadership execution. Specific behavioral disclosures include discussing the extent to which one speaks up to demand what one wants, strongly defends personal opinions against opposition, changes one’s mind during decision-making processes, directs group activities, organizes complex group projects, works in autonomous roles with sole responsibility, and takes the initiative to speak first in discussion groups.

3. Feminine Trait Self-Disclosure

This subscale captures the willingness to reveal socioemotional, communal, and expressive internal personality characteristics. It measures an individual’s transparency regarding their affective sensitivity, interpersonal warmth, and relational orientation. Scale items probe the willingness to discuss how warm, kind, gentle, sympathetic, understanding, considerate, and tender one believes oneself to be. Disclosing these dispositions necessitates a vulnerability to being perceived as soft-hearted, emotionally invested, or dependent on interpersonal connection.

4. Feminine Behavior Self-Disclosure

This dimension operationalizes the disclosure of concrete, overt communal actions and relational maintenance behaviors. It quantifies how openly an individual is willing to discuss expressive actions, kin-keeping efforts, and physical displays of affection. Topics include discussing how frequently one verbally validates friendships (“telling people you really like their friendship”), performs spontaneous prosocial acts (helping pick up dropped items), maintains long-distance social ties (calling old friends just to see how they are), provides non-verbal physical affection (kissing or hugging family members, holding hands), facilitates social gatherings (inviting others over just to talk), and fulfills familial obligations (visiting relatives).

5. Global Masculine and Feminine Indicators

In addition to the specific multidimensional trait and behavioral clusters, the MFSDS includes two global appraisal items: willingness to discuss “how masculine you are” (Item 41) and “how feminine you are” (Item 42). These single-item parameters capture an overarching, macro-level comfort with one’s gender identity and gendered self-presentation.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the MFSDS integrates several foundational paradigms from social psychology, gender role theory, and interpersonal communication.

1. Gender Schema Theory and the Instrumental-Expressive Paradigm

The primary theoretical bedrock of the MFSDS rests upon Sandra Bem’s (1974, 1981) Gender Schema Theory and the instrumental-expressive duality articulated by Janet Spence and Robert Helmreich (1978). Bem posited that gender-schematic information processing leads individuals to organize their self-concepts and social environments according to culturally defined definitions of masculinity and femininity. Masculinity has historically been linked to instrumentality—a motivational orientation focusing on agency, goal attainment, independence, and environmental mastery. Conversely, femininity has been linked to expressiveness—an affective orientation prioritizing communion, interpersonal harmony, emotional vulnerability, and relational preservation.

Snell and colleagues extended this conceptualization by arguing that gender schemas do not merely dictate self-concept or behavior; they actively regulate the communication of that behavior. Individuals filter their verbal self-revelations through self-evaluative gender standards. Disclosing feminine content may threaten a traditional masculine self-presentation, whereas suppressing masculine assertiveness may be strategically utilized by individuals adhering to traditional feminine modesty norms.

2. The Politics of Self-Presentation

A distinctive contribution of Snell, Belk, and Hawkins (1986) was framing self-disclosure as an act of impression management and micro-politics, heavily influenced by Erving Goffman’s (1959) dramaturgical theory and Edward Jones’s taxonomy of self-presentational strategies. Self-disclosure is rarely an unbiased data transfer; it is a strategic social behavior utilized to claim social status, project power, elicit social support, or establish intimacy. Revealing masculine traits and behaviors serves an intimidating or exemplifying function designed to manifest competence and autonomy. In contrast, disclosing feminine traits and behaviors serves an ingratiating or supplicating function designed to cultivate affection and communal interdependence. The willingness to reveal these dimensions is therefore contingent upon the power balance between the speaker and the target recipient.

3. Social Penetration and Privacy Boundary Regulation

The MFSDS also incorporates Altman and Taylor’s (1973) Social Penetration Theory and Sandra Petronio’s Communication Privacy Management theory. Interpersonal relationships progress through systematic stages of boundary permeability. However, Snell demonstrated that penetration trajectories differ dramatically based on topic gender-valence and recipient gender. For example, men frequently maintain high boundary resistance regarding expressive and feminine topics when interacting with male peers (due to fears of vulnerability, status loss, or perceived weakness), but show lower resistance when disclosing to female confidantes or professional therapists.

Validity

Empirical validation studies conducted by Snell and colleagues, as well as subsequent independent researchers, provide strong empirical support for the construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the MFSDS.

1. Construct and Factorial Validity

The structural integrity of the MFSDS was established through extensive exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic procedures across diverse collegiate and community samples. Factor structures consistently extract orthogonal masculine and feminine dimensions, confirming that masculine self-disclosure and feminine self-disclosure operate as independent, non-bipolar constructs rather than inverse poles of a single continuum. Furthermore, within each gender domain, empirical analyses support the structural divergence between trait-oriented disclosure and behavioral-oriented disclosure.

2. Convergent Validity

Convergent validity has been established through systematic correlations with established psychological inventories measuring gender orientation, interpersonal intimacy, and communication style:

• Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ) & Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI): Scores on the MFSDS Masculine Trait and Behavior subscales correlate positively and significantly with the Instrumentality (M) scales of the PAQ and BSRI ($r$ values typically ranging from .35 to .55, $p < .001$). Correspondingly, the Feminine Trait and Behavior subscales correlate strongly with the Expressiveness (F) scales ($r$ values ranging from .40 to .62, $p < .001$).
• Miller Social Intimacy Scale (MSIS): Feminine trait and behavioral disclosures demonstrate robust positive associations with measures of relational intimacy ($r pprox .45$), reflecting the foundational role of communal self-revelation in deepening psychological closeness.
• Generalized Self-Disclosure Scales: Moderate correlations ($r$ between .30 and .50) are observed between the MFSDS subscales and omnibus disclosure instruments like the Jourard Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (JSDQ), confirming that the MFSDS indexes generalized communicative openness while capturing unique, gender-differentiated variance unaccounted for by global disclosure metrics.

3. Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity is supported by negligible or non-significant correlations between the MFSDS subscales and unrelated personality constructs, including general cognitive intelligence, mechanical aptitude, and generalized talkativeness. Importantly, social desirability measures (such as the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale) demonstrate minimal correlation with the MFSDS subscales (typically $|r| < .15$), confirming that participant responses do not merely reflect an acquiescent need for social approval.

4. Predictive and Criterion-Related Validity

The MFSDS exhibits predictive power in interpersonal and clinical contexts. In empirical studies exploring target-gender differences (Snell, 1989; Snell et al., 1988), the scale demonstrated that:

• Both men and women report significantly higher willingness to disclose feminine traits and behaviors to female targets than to male targets, supporting sociological theories regarding the emotional receptivity of women in friendship networks.
• Men exhibiting high social anxiety and high adherence to traditional masculine norms showed restricted feminine trait disclosure, specifically to other men.
• In clinical analogs evaluating willingness to self-disclose to psychotherapists (Snell et al., 1988), the scale reliably predicted treatment engagement attitudes: female clients disclosed more expressive-feminine content to female clinicians, whereas instrumental-masculine disclosure remained stable across therapist gender.

Reliability

The psychometric reliability of the MFSDS has been established across multiple independent investigations, exhibiting high internal consistency and temporal stability.

1. Internal Consistency

In the original validation studies by Snell, Belk, and Hawkins (1986) involving male and female university cohorts, Cronbach’s coefficient alpha ($lpha$) was calculated across each 7-item subscale. The internal consistency metrics consistently exceed standard psychometric thresholds for research instruments:

• Masculine Trait Disclosure Scale: $lpha = .81$ to $.86$
• Masculine Behavior Disclosure Scale: $lpha = .78$ to $.84$
• Feminine Trait Disclosure Scale: $lpha = .83$ to $.88$
• Feminine Behavior Disclosure Scale: $lpha = .76$ to $.83$

Composite indices created by summing the trait and behavioral dimensions yield higher internal consistency estimates, frequently exceeding $lpha = .88$ for overall Masculine Disclosure and $lpha = .89$ for overall Feminine Disclosure.

2. Test-Retest Reliability

Temporal stability assessments conducted across short-term intervals (2 to 4 weeks) demonstrate that an individual’s willingness to disclose gender-stereotyped content remains stable in the absence of targeted communicative or clinical interventions. Pearson test-retest correlation coefficients ($r_{tt}$) reported across samples include:

• Masculine Trait Scale: $r_{tt} = .79$ ($p < .001$)
• Masculine Behavior Scale: $r_{tt} = .75$ ($p < .001$)
• Feminine Trait Scale: $r_{tt} = .82$ ($p < .001$)
• Feminine Behavior Scale: $r_{tt} = .78$ ($p < .001$)

These values demonstrate that the MFSDS measures relatively stable interpersonal communicative traits rather than fluctuating, transient situational states.

Factor Analysis

The latent structural foundation of the MFSDS was originally evaluated using principal components analysis with varimax orthogonal rotation, followed by modern confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to verify dimensional autonomy.

1. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Snell, Belk, and Hawkins (1986) subjected the scale items to exploratory factor analysis. The scree test and eigenvalue criteria ($lambda > 1.0$) identified distinct latent dimensions accounting for substantial proportions of total variance:

• Factor 1: Feminine Disclosure. Accounted for the largest share of communal variance. Items indexing kindness, warmth, sympathy, tenderness, and interpersonal affection loaded heavily on this factor (loadings ranging from .52 to .81).
• Factor 2: Masculine Disclosure. Accounted for independent variance characterized by agency, assertiveness, autonomy, efficiency, and task persistence (loadings ranging from .48 to .77).

Subsequent sub-analyses confirmed the separation between trait self-attributions and behavioral reports. Trait items loaded onto distinct cognitive-evaluative sub-factors, whereas behavioral items cleanly loaded onto action-oriented communication factors, supporting the 4-factor operationalization (Masculine Trait, Masculine Behavior, Feminine Trait, Feminine Behavior).

2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Subsequent CFA investigations examining the four-factor correlated model have substantiated the proposed structural validity across both male and female respondent groups. Goodness-of-fit indices typically satisfy contemporary psychometric standards:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Values consistently range between $.91$ and $.95$.
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): Values range between $.90$ and $.94$.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Coefficients range from $.048$ to $.062$, with a $90%$ confidence interval confirming close model fit.
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): Values typically register below $.060$.

Item factor loadings on their designated latent constructs are statistically significant ($p < .001$), with standardized lambda ($lambda$) coefficients exceeding $.50$ for all retained items, demonstrating convergent validity at the latent level.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale (MFSDS) is an objective, standardized, paper-and-pencil or computer-administered psychometric inventory.

• Test Type: Multidimensional self-report disclosure inventory.
• Item Count: 42 items total.
  • Masculine Trait Scale (MTS): 7 items (Items 1, 6, 21, 25, 30, 32, 35)
  • Masculine Behavior Scale (MBS): 7 items (Items 3, 11, 22, 23, 27, 34, 40)
  • Feminine Trait Scale (FTS): 7 items (Items 5, 12, 14, 17, 24, 33, 37)
  • Feminine Behavior Scale (FBS): 7 items (Items 2, 10, 13, 15, 29, 31, 38)
  • Global Masculinity Scale: 1 item (Item 41)
  • Global Femininity Scale: 1 item (Item 42)
  • Auxiliary / Filler Items: 12 items (Items 4, 7, 8, 9, 16, 18, 19, 20, 26, 28, 36, 39)
• Response Scale: 5-point Likert scale:
  • 0 = Not at all willing to discuss this topic with [Target]
  • 1 = Slightly willing to discuss this topic with [Target]
  • 2 = Moderately willing to discuss this topic with [Target]
  • 3 = Considerably willing to discuss this topic with [Target]
  • 4 = Totally willing to discuss this topic with [Target]
• Target Figures: The MFSDS can be administered with instructions directing participants to rate their willingness to discuss each topic with a specific interpersonal recipient (e.g., “a female friend,” “a male friend,” “your spouse/partner,” or “a counselor/therapist”). In comparative research designs, participants complete the scale multiple times across different designated targets.
• Administration Time: Approximately 10 to 15 minutes for a single target administration.
• Scoring Procedures: Subscale scores are calculated by summing the ratings for the items corresponding to each respective scale, or by calculating the mean item score (range 0 to 4):
  • Masculine Trait Score: $\sum(\text{Items } 1, 6, 21, 25, 30, 32, 35)$ [Score range: 0–28]
  • Masculine Behavior Score: $\sum(\text{Items } 3, 11, 22, 23, 27, 34, 40)$ [Score range: 0–28]
  • Feminine Trait Score: $\sum(\text{Items } 5, 12, 14, 17, 24, 33, 37)$ [Score range: 0–28]
  • Feminine Behavior Score: $\sum(\text{Items } 2, 10, 13, 15, 29, 31, 38)$ [Score range: 0–28]
  • Total Masculine Disclosure: Masculine Trait + Masculine Behavior [Score range: 0–56]
  • Total Feminine Disclosure: Feminine Trait + Feminine Behavior [Score range: 0–56]
  • Global Items: Item 41 and Item 42 are interpreted as standalone single-item indicators (Score range: 0–4 each).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale was formally published in 1986 by William E. Snell, Jr., Sharyn S. Belk, and Raymond C. Hawkins II in the peer-reviewed journal Sex Roles. Dr. Snell has made the MFSDS openly accessible for non-commercial academic, educational, and scientific research purposes. No licensing fees or royalties are required for academic investigators utilizing the scale in empirical research. Users are required to formally cite the original 1986 validation publication and Dr. Snell’s psychometric archives in any resultant publications, presentations, or dissertations. Commercial deployment or integration into commercial digital platforms requires prior written permission from the copyright holders and the scale author.

References

• Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
• Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036215
• Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354–364. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354
• Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday Anchor Books.
• Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 231–262). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Jourard, S. M. (1971). Self-disclosure: An experimental analysis of the transparent self. Wiley-Interscience.
• Snell, W. E., Jr. (1989). Willingness to self-disclose to female and male friends as a function of social anxiety and gender. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(1), 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167289151011
• Snell, W. E., Jr., Belk, S. S., Flowers, A., & Warren, J. (1988). Women’s and men’s willingness to self-disclose to therapists and friends: The moderating influence of instrumental, expressive, masculine, and feminine topics. Sex Roles, 18(11–12), 769–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288056
• Snell, W. E., Jr., Belk, S. S., & Hawkins, R. C., II. (1986). The Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale: The politics of masculine and feminine self-presentation. Sex Roles, 15(5–6), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288294
• Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. University of Texas Press.

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)