Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy: The Mediating Role of Gender Transcendence

Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy: The Mediating Role of Gender Transcendence | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy: The Mediating Role of Gender Transcendence Kanwal Shergill, Dr. Himangini Rathore Hooja This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4926499/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study examines the relationship between perceived familial gender discrimination (PFGD), gender transcendence (GT), and self-efficacy (SE) among young women. A sample of 568 female university students participated in the study, and data were analysed using correlation, regression, and mediation analyses. Results revealed that PFGD negatively predicted SE, indicating that higher levels of perceived discrimination within families are associated with lower self-efficacy. GT partially mediated this relationship, suggesting that individuals who adopt more egalitarian gender attitudes can mitigate some of the negative impacts of PFGD on SE. The findings support the importance of fostering gender-transcendent attitudes to promote resilience against the detrimental effects of gender discrimination. Psychology Gender Studies Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination Gender Transcendence Self-Efficacy Gender Bias Youth Mental Health Figures Figure 1 Introduction Research has consistently highlighted the detrimental impacts of gender discrimination perpetuated within families. For instance, Abi Rachid, Hankar and Zaman (2021) found that patriarchal parenting styles, characterized by emotional abuse and control, significantly contribute to unresolved trauma and sexist attitudes among young adults. This form of discrimination manifests in various ways, which includes biased parental expectations and unequal distribution of resources and responsibilities between male and female children. Such practices not only reinforce gender stereotypes but also hinder the psychological growth and self-efficacy of the affected individuals. Further studies, such as those by Zarar, Abrar and Gul (2021) and Choudhury and Choudhury (2020), underscore the prevalence of gender discrimination in familial settings across different cultural contexts. These studies reveal that discriminatory practices, ranging from decision-making power imbalances to restrictions on mobility and education, are deeply ingrained in societal norms and significantly impact women's mental health and social functioning. The persistent nature of these discriminatory practices necessitates a critical investigation of their long-term effects on self-efficacy and overall well-being. Self-efficacy, as defined by Bandura (1977) as the belief in one’s ability to achieve goals and manage situations, is a critical determinant of psychological health and success. The link between perceived familial gender discrimination and self-efficacy is well-documented. For instance, Sam (2019) demonstrated that adolescent girls who experience higher levels of gender discrimination within their families exhibit lower self-efficacy and greater emotional distress. Conversely, girls who perceive less discrimination tend to be more emotionally stable and employ positive coping strategies, suggesting that familial support and equality play vital roles in fostering self-efficacy. Moreover, Kira and associates (2015) found that gender discrimination negatively impacts self-efficacy by lowering self-esteem and increasing existential anxiety. These findings tell the importance of addressing gender biases within family environments to promote healthier psychological outcomes and enhance self-efficacy among women. Gender transcendence refers to the ability to move beyond traditional gender roles and stereotypes, embracing a more egalitarian view of gender. This concept is particularly applicable to the context of familial gender discrimination, as it offers a potential pathway for mitigating the adverse effects of such discrimination on self-efficacy. Studies by Pérez-Sánchez et al. (2021) and Russell et al. (2019) indicate that individuals who adopt gender-transcendent attitudes are better equipped to challenge discriminatory practices and develop a stronger sense of self-efficacy. The process of gender transcendence involves not only the rejection of traditional gender norms but also the active pursuit of gender equality in various life domains, including family, social, and professional spheres. Research by Nadeem and Khalid (2018) and Kulik (2018) suggests that promoting gender-transcendent attitudes can lead to more egalitarian behaviors and improved mental health outcomes, highlighting the transformative potential this approach carries. In conclusion, the exploration of perceived familial gender discrimination, self-efficacy, and gender transcendence offers valuable insights into the dynamics of gender inequality within family settings. By understanding these relationships, we can better address the root causes of gender discrimination and promote more equitable and supportive family environments. This study aims to contribute to this understanding by investigating the mediating role of gender transcendence in the link between familial gender discrimination and self-efficacy, thereby providing a framework for fostering gender equality and psychological well-being. Thus, the study aims to fulfill the following three objectives: To study the relationship between perceived familial gender discrimination, gender transcendence and self-efficacy. To explore the direct effect of perceived familial gender discrimination on gender transcendence and self-efficacy. To assess the mediating role of gender transcendence in the relationship between perceived familial gender discrimination and self-efficacy. Hypotheses H1: There will be a significant relationship between: Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination (PFGD) and Gender Transcendence (GT) Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination (PFGD) and Self-Efficacy (SE) H2: Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination will significantly predict Self-Efficacy H3: Gender Transcendence will moderate the relationship between Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy Methods Participants A total of 568 cisgender female university students were selected through purposive sampling based on the inclusion criteria that they were unmarried, enrolled in a full-time course, and not engaged in any part-time or full-time employment, entrepreneurial activities, or internships. Participants with a history of psychological issues, those identifying as LGBTQ+, and those pursuing university courses through correspondence or distance learning were excluded from the sample. The demographics of the sample are presented in Table 1. Tools 1. Gender Discrimination by Parents’ Behaviours subscale in Gender Discrimination Inventory (Kira, Hanna, and Bujold-Bugeaud, 2015): Gender Discrimination Inventory (GDI) contains a total of 33 items spread over two major scales: Gender Discrimination scales and Gender Discrimination Coping scales. The Gender Discrimination scales consist of Gender Discrimination by Parents’ Attitudes (GD-Pa), Gender Discrimination by Parents’ Behaviours (GD-Pb) and Gender Discrimination by Society (GD-S). While Gender Discrimination Coping scales consist of Internalized Gender Discrimination (IGD), Gender Identity Conflict (Gender Stigma) (GIC), and Gender Discrimination Resistance (GDR). This article used Gender Discrimination by Parents’ Behaviours (GD-Pb) subscale, which has 6 items with 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). GD-Pb subscale has Cronbach alpha value of 0.78 ( p > 0.05), and test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.76 ( p > 0.05). Gender Discrimination Inventory has a good overall construct validity, and GD-Pb subscale has a good fit (χ2 = 5.465, p > 0.05; comparative fit index = 1.000, p > 0.05). 2. Gender Transcendence subscale in Social Roles Questionnaire (Baber and Tucker, 2006): The Social Roles Questionnaire (SRQ) assesses attitudes towards gender roles by evaluating the variety in individuals' perspectives on societal roles for both men and women, while also identifying attitudes that go beyond traditional binary classifications. It has two subscales: Gender-Linked and Gender Transcendent. This article has used the Gender Transcendent (GT) subscale to measure gender transcendence. The GT subscale has 5 items with percentage scale ranging from 0% to 100%, with 10% increments (0% = Strongly Disagree, 100% = Strongly Agree). GT subscale has a Cronbach alpha value of 0.71, and test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.81 ( p > 0.01). Convergent validity was calculated with Modern Sexism Scale and Career Orientation Scale. GT moderately correlated with Modern Sexism Scale (0.37, p > 0.01), and has a moderate negative correlation of -0.49 ( p > 0.01) with Career Orientation Scale. However, in order to maintain uniformity in scoring and statistical analysis of the data collected for this article, a 5-point Likert scale was used (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree), which was approved and provided by the author Corinna Tucker herself. This method was also used in a thesis by Campos (2018). 3. New General Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSE; Chen, Gully, and Eden in 2001): New General Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSE) has 8 items with 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). It has a test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.67 ( p > 0.01). Internal consistency was calculated with Cronbach alpha before and after a college examination, as the scale was standardized on college students. Internal consistency reliability was high on both administrations (α = .86 and .90). NGSE Scale was validated with Sherer and associates’ SGSE Scale (1982). NGSE Scale was found to have better construct validity for general self-efficacy, better discriminant validity, and is a better predictor of constructs like exam performance and specific self-efficacy. Procedure The questionnaire was administered through online mode, and it was created using the Google Forms platform. The authors approached the Department Heads of all subjects to know the strength of students in each undergraduate and postgraduate batch. The author also collected time tables of each batch in order to meet and interact with the students so that those eligible for the study were screened. The author went to each batch at an appropriate time suggested by the Department Head, and briefly explained the nature of her work. Students were asked questions on the basis of the inclusion criteria such as marital status, employment status, and having male siblings. Only those matching the inclusion criteria raised their hands. The students were assured of their confidentiality and provision of assistance in case of any doubt or confusion by the author during the classroom interactive session. Then the eligible students gave their names and contact numbers to the author in order to receive the questionnaire through a Google Forms link. After the data was collected and then scored, statistical analysis was conducted. Adherence to Ethics and Ethical Concern The authors presented the purpose and methods of the study to the University’s Research Ethics Committee, where they have discussed the background, rationale, sample, tools, procedure and analytical tools with the Committee Members, after which the study was approved for data collection. Statistical Analyses IBM-SPSS® version 22 was used to do the following data analysis: Descriptive Statistics Correlation Multiple Regression Analysis Mediation Analysis (conducted using the PROCESS extension version 4.2 in the IBM-SPSS®) Results and Discussion Table 1 Demographic Statistics for Age and Siblings n % Mean Age Range 21.06 17–19 165 31.0% 20–22 250 47.0% 23–25 137 25.8% 26–28 14 2.6% 29 and above 2 0.4% Number of Male Siblings 1 481 86.7% 2 2+ 44 7.9% 40 7.2% Elder/Younger Brother Elder 238 43.0% Younger 285 51.4% Both Elder + Younger 44 7.9% Twin 2 4.0% The majority of participants were between 20 and 22 years old at the time of the study, with a mean age of 21.06 years. More than half of the participants reported having only one brother, typically a younger brother. This finding is in alignment with previous studies conducted in India and other countries, which have documented couples' attempts to conceive a male child after the birth of a first-born female (Singh et al., 2021 ; Chaudhuri, 2012 ; Basu & de Jong, 2010 ; Clark, 2000 ). Only two participants had a twin brother. Table 2 Descriptive Statistics of the study variables Variable N M SD Skewness SE Skewness Kurtosis SE Kurtosis PFGD 568 16.42 5.95 -0.15 0.10 -0.95 0.21 GT 568 19.78 3.70 -0.51 0.10 -0.15 0.21 SE 568 30.28 4.91 -0.25 0.10 0.75 0.21 The mean score for PFGD was 16.42 (SD = 5.95), indicating moderate levels of perceived discrimination within families. GT had a mean score of 19.78 (SD = 3.70), suggesting a moderate degree of gender transcendence among participants. SE scored higher with a mean of 30.28 (SD = 4.91), reflecting generally high self-efficacy among the sample. The sample fulfils the assumptions of normal distribution, and it is neither skewed, nor platykurtic, and nor leptokurtic. This was concluded by finding a common ground among numerous sources that have given different acceptable range of values of skewness and kurtosis. Field (2013), Gravetter & Wallnau ( 2014 ), and George and Mallery ( 2010 ) proposed a range of ± 2; Tabachnick and Fidell ( 2013 ) suggested the threshold between − 1.5 to + 1.5; and Bulmer (1979) recommended the range of ± 1. Table 3 Correlations among the study variables Mean SD 1 2 3 1 Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination 16.4155 5.95455 − .262 ** − .223 ** 2 Gender Transcendence 19.7817 3.69921 − .262 ** .476 ** 3 Self-Efficacy 30.2764 4.90970 − .223 ** .476 ** **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Pearson correlations in Table 3 revealed significant relationships between the variables. PFGD was negatively correlated with gender transcendence ( r = -0.262, p < .01), indicating that higher levels of perceived gender discrimination were associated with lower levels of gender transcendence. This proves Hypothesis 1(a), which states that PFGD will have a significant relationship with GT. Dhar, Jain, and Jayachandran’s ( 2019 ) study on sixth and seventh graders and their parents from Haryana uncovered a significant positive correlation between parental and child attitudes, with maternal influence surpassing paternal influence. On an average, when a parent holds a more discriminatory gender attitude, their child is 15 percentage points more likely to adopt a similar stance. Notably, mothers' attitudes wield a 50% stronger impact compared to fathers'. PFGD was negatively correlated with self-efficacy ( r = -0.223, p < .01), indicating that higher levels of perceived gender discrimination were associated with lower levels of self-efficacy. This proves Hypothesis 1(b), which states that PFGD will have a significant relationship with SE. Dercon and Singh’s ( 2013 ) cohort study delves into the impact of gender bias and discrimination on self-efficacy among children aged 8, 12, and 15 in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam. The study comprehensively examines various facets such as nutrition, education, aspirations, subjective well-being, and psychosocial abilities (self-efficacy, trust, self-esteem, and inclusion). The findings show the presence of entrenched gender bias against girls in education, particularly evident in India and, to some extent, in Ethiopia. In particular, girls in these regions exhibited lower levels of self-efficacy. Specifically, the research underscores that self-efficacy is considered as a masculine trait not expected to be possessed by females, within the contexts of India and Ethiopia, a phenomenon directly linked to the prevailing institutionalized gender bias. Table 4 Regression Analysis Coefficients predicting Self-Efficacy from Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination Predictor B SE B β t p Constant 33.296 0.590 56.45 .000 PFGD -0.184 0.034 -0.223 -5.445 .000 GT 0.594 0.051 0.448 11.76 .000 Note : PFGD = Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination; GT = Gender Transcendence. The dependent variable is Self-Efficacy. As it can be observed from Table 4 , PFGD was a significant negative predictor of SE (B = -0.184, t (566) = -5.445, p < .001), accounting for 5% of the variance in SE (R² = 0.050). This finding suggests that higher perceived gender discrimination within families leads to lower self-efficacy among young women, thus proving Hypothesis 2. This finding can be explained by what Steele and Aronson ( 1995 ) call stereotype threat, in which individuals are at risk of conforming to stereotypes about their social group, which can lead to anxiety and reduced performance in tasks where the stereotype is relevant. A female child’ self-efficacy decreases due to internalized negative stereotypes, anxiety and pressure from her family to conform, restrictions placed by them reducing advanced opportunities to grow and succeed, and lack of support and encouragement by the family itself. Table 5 Direct, Indirect and Total Effects of the study variables Boot 95% CI Effects B SE t p LL UL Standardized Coefficent Direct Effects -0.0871 0.0314 -2.7729 .0057 -0.1488 -0.0254 -0.1056 Indirect Effects -0.0969 0.0185 - - -0.1353 -0.0631 -0.1175 Total Effects − .1840 .0338 -5.4451 < .001 -0.2503 -0.1176 -0.2231 The mediation analysis revealed that GT partially mediated the relationship between PFGD and SE. The direct effect of PFGD on SE was significant (B = -0.0871, p < .01), as was the indirect effect through GT (B = -0.097, 95% CI [-0.135, -0.063]). This indicates that gender transcendence reduces the negative impact of familial gender discrimination on self-efficacy, though not entirely, thus proving Hypothesis 3. This can be observed in Table 5 and Fig. 1. Self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987 ) posits that discrepancies between an individual's actual self, ideal self, and ought self can lead to negative emotions and reduced self-efficacy. Gender discrimination experiences at home creates a self-discrepancy by making the female feel that she does not meet the traditional gender expectations imposed by her family. By adopting non-traditional gender roles, that is, gender transcendence, the young female reduces the internal conflict between societal expectations and personal identity, leading to a partial mediation effect where SE is improved despite the presence of PFGD. Gender transcendence may also serve as a positive cognitive reappraisal method of coping (Gross, 2002 ), where the individual reinterprets the meaning of traditional gender roles and discrimination, adopting a more egalitarian perspective. This reinterpretation helps to maintain self-efficacy amidst the discriminating home environment. GT also represents a process of empowerment for some females, where the traditional gender roles are transcended, thereby gaining a sense of control and agency. This empowerment (Rappaport, 1987 ) can partially offset the negative impact of PFGD on self-efficacy by providing the individual with a more robust sense of personal efficacy and enabling the individual to maintain or enhance their self-efficacy despite the adverse effects of perceived familial gender discrimination. Conclusion This study explored the effects of perceived familial gender discrimination on gender transcendence and self-efficacy among young women. The results indicate that higher levels of perceived discrimination are associated with lower levels of gender transcendence and self-efficacy, with gender transcendence partially mediating the relationship between discrimination and self-efficacy. These findings suggest that gender transcendence can serve as a protective factor, helping women maintain their self-efficacy even in the face of discriminatory family dynamics. The results of this study aligns with findings from King et al. ( 2022 ) and Weis et al. ( 2018 ), who demonstrated that gender egalitarianism is associated with better mental health and greater willingness to confront gender-based discrimination. Implications The study’s findings have several practical implications. First, interventions aimed at reducing familial gender discrimination should emphasize the development of gender-transcendent attitudes among young women. Educational programs that promote gender equality and challenge traditional gender roles could empower women to overcome the limitations imposed by discriminatory family environments. Additionally, psychological support services should focus on enhancing self-efficacy in young women, particularly those from discriminatory households, to help them build resilience against the negative impacts of such environments. Suggestions for Future Research Future studies should investigate the broader psychological and social consequences of perceived familial gender discrimination, including its effects on, for example, mental health and academic performance. Longitudinal research would be especially useful in determining causal links and examining the lasting impact of gender discrimination on self-efficacy and gender transcendence. Furthermore, it is essential to explore how gender discrimination intersects with other forms of discrimination, such as those related to race or socioeconomic status, to gain a more holistic understanding of the challenges young women face in various contexts. References Abi Rached M, Hankir A, Zaman R (2021) Patriarchal upbringing in the 21st century: the impact emotional abuse related to parental styles has on the genesis of gender inequality and the development of unresolved trauma in children. Psychiatria Danubina 33(suppl 11):121–132 Baber KM, Tucker CJ (2006) The Social Roles Questionnaire: A New Approach to Measure Attitudes toward Gender. Sex Roles 54:459–467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9018-y Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychol Rev 84(2):191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 Basu D, de Jong R (2010) Son Targeting Fertility Behavior: Some Consequences and Determinants. Demography 47(2):521–536. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/dem.0.0110 Campos NR (2018) Reentering The Workforce After A Gap In Employment: Biases, Stereotypes, And Gender Roles (Master's Thesis, Middle Tennessee State University) Chaudhuri S (2012) The Desire for Sons and Excess Fertility: A Household-Level Analysis of Parity Progression in India. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health , 2012, 38(4), 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1363/3817812 Choudhury T, Choudhury R (2020) The Conversation: Understanding Young Women’s Childhood and its Impact on Mental Health at the University Counselling Centre. J Humanit Social Sci Stud 2(4):159–169 Chen G, Gully SM, Eden D (2001) Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale. Organizational Res Methods 4(1):62–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810141004 Clark S (2000) Son Preference and Sex Composition of Children: Evidence from India. Demography 37(1):95–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2648099 Dercon S, Singh A (2013) From Nutrition to Aspirations and Self-Efficacy: Gender Bias over Time among Children in Four Countries. World Dev 45:31–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.12.001 Dhar D, Jain T, Jayachandran S (2019) Intergenerational transmission of gender attitudes: Evidence from India. J Dev Stud 55(12):2572–2592 George D, Mallery M (2010) SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0. Pearson Gravetter F, Wallnau L (2014) Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences. Wadsworth Gross JJ (2002) Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology 39:281–291. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0048577201393198 Higgins ET (1987) Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect. Psychol Rev 94(3):319–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319 King T, Perales F, Singh A, Gurrin L, Crammond B (2022) Traditionalism vs Egalitarianism: Is there an Association between Gender Attitudes and Mental Health? Australian New Z J Psychiatry 56(7):844–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674211031488 Kira IA, Hanaa S, Bujold-Bugeaud M (2015) Gender Discrimination (GD): A Conceptual Trauma-based Framework for GD and the Development of Gender Discrimination Inventory. Psychology 6:2041–2070. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2015.616201 Kulik L (2018) Explaining Egalitarianism in Gender-Role attitudes. Asian Women 34(2):61–87. https://doi.org/10.14431/aw.2018.06.34.2.61 Nadeem F, Khalid R (2018) The relationship of gender role attitudes with career aspirations and career choices among young adults. Pakistan J Psychol Res 33(2):455–471 Pérez-Sánchez B, Concha-Salgado A, Fernández-Suárez A, Juarros-Basterretxea J, Rodríguez-Díaz FJ (2021) The Gender Role Attitude Scale (GRAS) as an alternative for the crisis in measurement of attitudes towards gender roles in Latin America: A study in Chilean university students. Anales De Psicologia (Annals Psychology) 37(3):567–576. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.438431 Rappaport J (1987) Terms of Empowerment/Exemplars of Prevention: Toward a Theory for Community Psychology. Am J Community Psychol 15(2):121–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919275 Russell EJ, DeRubeis J, Gifford A, Royer A, Schaefer J, Odiet E, Stanley G, Dose G (2019) College Women’s Feminist Consciousness and Perceptions of Parents’ Gender-Related Attitudes . [Poster Abstract]. Winona State University, Winona, Minnesota, USA. Retrieved from https://openriver.winona.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=studentgrants2020 Sam S (2019) Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination in relation to Personality Pattern, Adjustment Level, Ways of Coping and Mental Health of Adolescent Girls. Pharma Innov J 8(1):90–96 Singh A, Kumar K, Yadav AK, James KS, McDougal L, Atmavilas Y, Raj A (2021) Factors Influencing the Sex Ratio at Birth in India: A New Analysis based on Births Occurring between 2005 and 2016. Stud Fam Plann 52(1):41–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12147 Steele CM, Aronson J (1995) Stereotype Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of African Americans. J Personal Soc Psychol 69(5):797–811. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797 Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2013) Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson Weis AS, Redford L, Zucker AN, Ratliff KA (2018) Feminist Identity, Attitudes Toward Feminist Prototypes, and Willingness to Intervene in Everyday Sexist Events. Psychol Women Q 42(3):279–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318764694 Zarar A, Gul (2021) Causes and Impact of Gender Discrimination on Women’s Development. Pakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language , 7 (2), 145–154. Retrieved from https://jehanf.com/pjsel/index.php/journal/article/view/468 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4926499","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":341247275,"identity":"aeabe9fe-627c-4a3e-aae1-ff5b3ec4b272","order_by":0,"name":"Kanwal Shergill","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4395-4493","institution":"The IIS University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kanwal","middleName":"","lastName":"Shergill","suffix":""},{"id":341247704,"identity":"91de5469-a369-4788-a87a-d6057390cd5c","order_by":1,"name":"Dr. Himangini Rathore Hooja","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The IIS University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"Dr.","firstName":"Himangini","middleName":"Rathore","lastName":"Hooja","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-08-16 17:36:39","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4926499/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4926499/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":62740529,"identity":"aa5931dc-f776-451b-b3c8-ac291a92ee12","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-19 02:40:34","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":20321,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMediation analysis model of PFGD, GT, and SE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4926499/v1/d2d50478df39c419099a715e.png"},{"id":62740789,"identity":"6b415063-4a7b-4f28-a5f9-fe19224c6610","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-19 02:48:34","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":562346,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4926499/v1/6ad6b0d7-d6f1-42c6-926e-28a6cc68dd4c.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePerceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy: The Mediating Role of Gender Transcendence\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eResearch has consistently highlighted the detrimental impacts of gender discrimination perpetuated within families. For instance, Abi Rachid, Hankar and Zaman (2021) found that patriarchal parenting styles, characterized by emotional abuse and control, significantly contribute to unresolved trauma and sexist attitudes among young adults. This form of discrimination manifests in various ways, which includes biased parental expectations and unequal distribution of resources and responsibilities between male and female children. Such practices not only reinforce gender stereotypes but also hinder the psychological growth and self-efficacy of the affected individuals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurther studies, such as those by Zarar, Abrar and Gul (2021) and Choudhury and Choudhury (2020), underscore the prevalence of gender discrimination in familial settings across different cultural contexts. These studies reveal that discriminatory practices, ranging from decision-making power imbalances to restrictions on mobility and education, are deeply ingrained in societal norms and significantly impact women's mental health and social functioning. The persistent nature of these discriminatory practices necessitates a critical investigation of their long-term effects on self-efficacy and overall well-being.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSelf-efficacy, as defined by Bandura (1977) as the belief in one\u0026rsquo;s ability to achieve goals and manage situations, is a critical determinant of psychological health and success. The link between perceived familial gender discrimination and self-efficacy is well-documented. For instance, Sam (2019) demonstrated that adolescent girls who experience higher levels of gender discrimination within their families exhibit lower self-efficacy and greater emotional distress. Conversely, girls who perceive less discrimination tend to be more emotionally stable and employ positive coping strategies, suggesting that familial support and equality play vital roles in fostering self-efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoreover, Kira and associates (2015) found that gender discrimination negatively impacts self-efficacy by lowering self-esteem and increasing existential anxiety. These findings tell the importance of addressing gender biases within family environments to promote healthier psychological outcomes and enhance self-efficacy among women.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGender transcendence refers to the ability to move beyond traditional gender roles and stereotypes, embracing a more egalitarian view of gender. This concept is particularly applicable to the context of familial gender discrimination, as it offers a potential pathway for mitigating the adverse effects of such discrimination on self-efficacy. Studies by P\u0026eacute;rez-S\u0026aacute;nchez et al. (2021) and Russell et al. (2019) indicate that individuals who adopt gender-transcendent attitudes are better equipped to challenge discriminatory practices and develop a stronger sense of self-efficacy. The process of gender transcendence involves not only the rejection of traditional gender norms but also the active pursuit of gender equality in various life domains, including family, social, and professional spheres. Research by Nadeem and Khalid (2018) and Kulik (2018) suggests that promoting gender-transcendent attitudes can lead to more egalitarian behaviors and improved mental health outcomes, highlighting the transformative potential this approach carries.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, the exploration of perceived familial gender discrimination, self-efficacy, and gender transcendence offers valuable insights into the dynamics of gender inequality within family settings. By understanding these relationships, we can better address the root causes of gender discrimination and promote more equitable and supportive family environments. This study aims to contribute to this understanding by investigating the mediating role of gender transcendence in the link between familial gender discrimination and self-efficacy, thereby providing a framework for fostering gender equality and psychological well-being. Thus, the study aims to fulfill the following three objectives:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTo study the relationship between perceived familial gender discrimination, gender transcendence and self-efficacy.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTo explore the direct effect of perceived familial gender discrimination on gender transcendence and self-efficacy.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTo assess the mediating role of gender transcendence in the relationship between perceived familial gender discrimination and self-efficacy.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypotheses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH1: There will be a significant relationship between:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col style=\"list-style-type: lower-alpha;\"\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePerceived Familial Gender Discrimination (PFGD) and Gender Transcendence (GT)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePerceived Familial Gender Discrimination (PFGD) and Self-Efficacy (SE)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH2: Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination will significantly predict Self-Efficacy\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eH3: Gender Transcendence will moderate the relationship between Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eParticipants \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA total of 568 cisgender female university students were selected through purposive sampling based on the inclusion criteria that they were unmarried, enrolled in a full-time course, and not engaged in any part-time or full-time employment, entrepreneurial activities, or internships. Participants with a history of psychological issues, those identifying as LGBTQ+, and those pursuing university courses through correspondence or distance learning were excluded from the sample. The demographics of the sample are presented in Table 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTools\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e1. Gender Discrimination by Parents\u0026rsquo; Behaviours subscale in Gender Discrimination Inventory (Kira, Hanna, and Bujold-Bugeaud, 2015):\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGender Discrimination Inventory (GDI) contains a total of 33 items spread over two major scales: Gender Discrimination scales and Gender Discrimination Coping scales. The Gender Discrimination scales consist of Gender Discrimination by Parents\u0026rsquo; Attitudes (GD-Pa), Gender Discrimination by Parents\u0026rsquo; Behaviours (GD-Pb) and Gender Discrimination by Society (GD-S). While Gender Discrimination Coping scales consist of Internalized Gender Discrimination (IGD), Gender Identity Conflict (Gender Stigma) (GIC), and Gender Discrimination Resistance (GDR).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis article used Gender Discrimination by Parents\u0026rsquo; Behaviours (GD-Pb) subscale, which has 6 items with 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). GD-Pb subscale has Cronbach alpha value of 0.78 (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.05), and test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.76 (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.05). Gender Discrimination Inventory has a good overall construct validity, and GD-Pb subscale has a good fit (\u0026chi;2 = 5.465, \u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.05; comparative fit index = 1.000, \u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2. Gender Transcendence subscale in Social Roles Questionnaire (Baber and Tucker, 2006): \u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Social Roles Questionnaire (SRQ) assesses attitudes towards gender roles by evaluating the variety in individuals' perspectives on societal roles for both men and women, while also identifying attitudes that go beyond traditional binary classifications. It has two subscales: Gender-Linked and Gender Transcendent.\u0026nbsp; This article has used the Gender Transcendent (GT) subscale to measure gender transcendence. The GT subscale has 5 items with percentage scale ranging from 0% to 100%, with 10% increments (0% = Strongly Disagree, 100% = Strongly Agree). GT subscale has a Cronbach alpha value of 0.71, and test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.81 (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.01). Convergent validity was calculated with Modern Sexism Scale and Career Orientation Scale. GT moderately correlated with Modern Sexism Scale (0.37, \u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.01), and has a moderate negative correlation of -0.49 (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.01) with Career Orientation Scale.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, in order to maintain uniformity in scoring and statistical analysis of the data collected for this article, a 5-point Likert scale was used (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree), which was approved and provided by the author Corinna Tucker herself. This method was also used in a thesis by Campos (2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3. New General Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSE; Chen, Gully, and Eden in 2001): \u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNew General Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSE) has 8 items with 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). It has a test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.67 (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt; 0.01). Internal consistency was calculated with Cronbach alpha before and after a college examination, as the scale was standardized on college students. Internal consistency reliability was high on both administrations (\u0026alpha; = .86 and .90). NGSE Scale was validated with Sherer and associates\u0026rsquo; SGSE Scale (1982). NGSE Scale was found to have better construct validity for general self-efficacy, better discriminant validity, and is a better predictor of constructs like exam performance and specific self-efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eProcedure\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire was administered through online mode, and it was created using the Google Forms platform. The authors approached the Department Heads of all subjects to know the strength of students in each undergraduate and postgraduate batch. The author also collected time tables of each batch in order to meet and interact with the students so that those eligible for the study were screened. The author went to each batch at an appropriate time suggested by the Department Head, and briefly explained the nature of her work. Students were asked questions on the basis of the inclusion criteria such as marital status, employment status, and having male siblings. Only those matching the inclusion criteria raised their hands. The students were assured of their confidentiality and provision of assistance in case of any doubt or confusion by the author during the classroom interactive session. Then the eligible students gave their names and contact numbers to the author in order to receive the questionnaire through a Google Forms link. After the data was collected and then scored, statistical analysis was conducted.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdherence to Ethics and Ethical Concern\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors presented the purpose and methods of the study to the University\u0026rsquo;s Research Ethics Committee, where they have discussed the background, rationale, sample, tools, procedure and analytical tools with the Committee Members, after which the study was approved for data collection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eStatistical Analyses\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIBM-SPSS\u0026reg; version 22 was used to do the following data analysis:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDescriptive Statistics\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCorrelation\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMultiple Regression Analysis\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMediation Analysis (conducted using the PROCESS extension version 4.2 in the IBM-SPSS\u0026reg;)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDemographic Statistics for Age and Siblings\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge Range\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u0026ndash;19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u0026ndash;22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e250\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u0026ndash;25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e137\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u0026ndash;28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29 and above\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNumber of Male Siblings\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e481\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2+\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.2%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eElder/Younger Brother\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eElder\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e238\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYounger\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e285\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoth Elder\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Younger\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTwin\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe majority of participants were between 20 and 22 years old at the time of the study, with a mean age of 21.06 years. More than half of the participants reported having only one brother, typically a younger brother. This finding is in alignment with previous studies conducted in India and other countries, which have documented couples\u0026apos; attempts to conceive a male child after the birth of a first-born female (Singh et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Chaudhuri, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Basu \u0026amp; de Jong, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Clark, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). Only two participants had a twin brother.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive Statistics of the study variables\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE Skewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE Kurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePFGD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e568\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e568\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e568\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe mean score for PFGD was 16.42 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.95), indicating moderate levels of perceived discrimination within families. GT had a mean score of 19.78 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.70), suggesting a moderate degree of gender transcendence among participants. SE scored higher with a mean of 30.28 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.91), reflecting generally high self-efficacy among the sample. The sample fulfils the assumptions of normal distribution, and it is neither skewed, nor platykurtic, and nor leptokurtic. This was concluded by finding a common ground among numerous sources that have given different acceptable range of values of skewness and kurtosis. Field (2013), Gravetter \u0026amp; Wallnau (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), and George and Mallery (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) proposed a range of \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2; Tabachnick and Fidell (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) suggested the threshold between \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.5 to +\u0026thinsp;1.5; and Bulmer (1979) recommended the range of \u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCorrelations among the study variables\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePerceived Familial Gender Discrimination\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.4155\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.95455\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.262\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.223\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender Transcendence\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.7817\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.69921\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.262\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.476\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSelf-Efficacy\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.2764\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.90970\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.223\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.476\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePearson correlations in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e revealed significant relationships between the variables. PFGD was negatively correlated with gender transcendence (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e = -0.262, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01), indicating that higher levels of perceived gender discrimination were associated with lower levels of gender transcendence. This proves Hypothesis 1(a), which states that PFGD will have a significant relationship with GT. Dhar, Jain, and Jayachandran\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) study on sixth and seventh graders and their parents from Haryana uncovered a significant positive correlation between parental and child attitudes, with maternal influence surpassing paternal influence. On an average, when a parent holds a more discriminatory gender attitude, their child is 15 percentage points more likely to adopt a similar stance. Notably, mothers\u0026apos; attitudes wield a 50% stronger impact compared to fathers\u0026apos;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePFGD was negatively correlated with self-efficacy (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e = -0.223, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01), indicating that higher levels of perceived gender discrimination were associated with lower levels of self-efficacy. This proves Hypothesis 1(b), which states that PFGD will have a significant relationship with SE. Dercon and Singh\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) cohort study delves into the impact of gender bias and discrimination on self-efficacy among children aged 8, 12, and 15 in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam. The study comprehensively examines various facets such as nutrition, education, aspirations, subjective well-being, and psychosocial abilities (self-efficacy, trust, self-esteem, and inclusion). The findings show the presence of entrenched gender bias against girls in education, particularly evident in India and, to some extent, in Ethiopia. In particular, girls in these regions exhibited lower levels of self-efficacy. Specifically, the research underscores that self-efficacy is considered as a masculine trait not expected to be possessed by females, within the contexts of India and Ethiopia, a phenomenon directly linked to the prevailing institutionalized gender bias.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRegression Analysis Coefficients predicting Self-Efficacy from Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePredictor\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE B\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026beta;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConstant\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.296\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.590\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePFGD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.184\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.223\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.445\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.594\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.051\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.448\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNote\u003c/strong\u003e: PFGD = Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination; GT = Gender Transcendence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe dependent variable is Self-Efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs it can be observed from Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, PFGD was a significant negative predictor of SE (B = -0.184, \u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e (566) = -5.445, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), accounting for 5% of the variance in SE (R\u0026sup2; = 0.050). This finding suggests that higher perceived gender discrimination within families leads to lower self-efficacy among young women, thus proving Hypothesis 2.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis finding can be explained by what Steele and Aronson (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e) call stereotype threat, in which individuals are at risk of conforming to stereotypes about their social group, which can lead to anxiety and reduced performance in tasks where the stereotype is relevant. A female child\u0026rsquo; self-efficacy decreases due to internalized negative stereotypes, anxiety and pressure from her family to conform, restrictions placed by them reducing advanced opportunities to grow and succeed, and lack of support and encouragement by the family itself.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDirect, Indirect and Total Effects of the study variables\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoot 95% CI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEffects\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandardized Coefficent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDirect Effects\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.0871\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0314\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.7729\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.0057\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.1488\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.0254\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.1056\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIndirect Effects\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.0969\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.0185\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.1353\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.0631\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.1175\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal Effects\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.1840\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.0338\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.4451\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.2503\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.1176\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.2231\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe mediation analysis revealed that GT partially mediated the relationship between PFGD and SE. The direct effect of PFGD on SE was significant (B = -0.0871, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01), as was the indirect effect through GT (B = -0.097, 95% CI [-0.135, -0.063]). This indicates that gender transcendence reduces the negative impact of familial gender discrimination on self-efficacy, though not entirely, thus proving Hypothesis 3. This can be observed in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e and Fig. 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSelf-discrepancy theory (Higgins, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1987\u003c/span\u003e) posits that discrepancies between an individual\u0026apos;s actual self, ideal self, and ought self can lead to negative emotions and reduced self-efficacy. Gender discrimination experiences at home creates a self-discrepancy by making the female feel that she does not meet the traditional gender expectations imposed by her family. By adopting non-traditional gender roles, that is, gender transcendence, the young female reduces the internal conflict between societal expectations and personal identity, leading to a partial mediation effect where SE is improved despite the presence of PFGD. Gender transcendence may also serve as a positive cognitive reappraisal method of coping (Gross, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e), where the individual reinterprets the meaning of traditional gender roles and discrimination, adopting a more egalitarian perspective. This reinterpretation helps to maintain self-efficacy amidst the discriminating home environment. GT also represents a process of empowerment for some females, where the traditional gender roles are transcended, thereby gaining a sense of control and agency. This empowerment (Rappaport, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1987\u003c/span\u003e) can partially offset the negative impact of PFGD on self-efficacy by providing the individual with a more robust sense of personal efficacy and enabling the individual to maintain or enhance their self-efficacy despite the adverse effects of perceived familial gender discrimination.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study explored the effects of perceived familial gender discrimination on gender transcendence and self-efficacy among young women. The results indicate that higher levels of perceived discrimination are associated with lower levels of gender transcendence and self-efficacy, with gender transcendence partially mediating the relationship between discrimination and self-efficacy. These findings suggest that gender transcendence can serve as a protective factor, helping women maintain their self-efficacy even in the face of discriminatory family dynamics. The results of this study aligns with findings from King et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Weis et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), who demonstrated that gender egalitarianism is associated with better mental health and greater willingness to confront gender-based discrimination.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Implications","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study\u0026rsquo;s findings have several practical implications. First, interventions aimed at reducing familial gender discrimination should emphasize the development of gender-transcendent attitudes among young women. Educational programs that promote gender equality and challenge traditional gender roles could empower women to overcome the limitations imposed by discriminatory family environments. Additionally, psychological support services should focus on enhancing self-efficacy in young women, particularly those from discriminatory households, to help them build resilience against the negative impacts of such environments.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Suggestions for Future Research","content":"\u003cp\u003eFuture studies should investigate the broader psychological and social consequences of perceived familial gender discrimination, including its effects on, for example, mental health and academic performance. Longitudinal research would be especially useful in determining causal links and examining the lasting impact of gender discrimination on self-efficacy and gender transcendence. Furthermore, it is essential to explore how gender discrimination intersects with other forms of discrimination, such as those related to race or socioeconomic status, to gain a more holistic understanding of the challenges young women face in various contexts.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbi Rached M, Hankir A, Zaman R (2021) Patriarchal upbringing in the 21st century: the impact emotional abuse related to parental styles has on the genesis of gender inequality and the development of unresolved trauma in children. Psychiatria Danubina 33(suppl 11):121\u0026ndash;132\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaber KM, Tucker CJ (2006) The Social Roles Questionnaire: A New Approach to Measure Attitudes toward Gender. Sex Roles 54:459\u0026ndash;467. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9018-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11199-006-9018-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychol Rev 84(2):191\u0026ndash;215. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBasu D, de Jong R (2010) Son Targeting Fertility Behavior: Some Consequences and Determinants. Demography 47(2):521\u0026ndash;536. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1353/dem.0.0110\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1353/dem.0.0110\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampos NR (2018) \u003cem\u003eReentering The Workforce After A Gap In Employment: Biases, Stereotypes, And Gender Roles\u003c/em\u003e (Master's Thesis, Middle Tennessee State University)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChaudhuri S (2012) The Desire for Sons and Excess Fertility: A Household-Level Analysis of Parity Progression in India. \u003cem\u003eInternational Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\u003c/em\u003e, 2012, 38(4), 178\u0026ndash;186. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1363/3817812\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1363/3817812\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChoudhury T, Choudhury R (2020) The Conversation: Understanding Young Women\u0026rsquo;s Childhood and its Impact on Mental Health at the University Counselling Centre. J Humanit Social Sci Stud 2(4):159\u0026ndash;169\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen G, Gully SM, Eden D (2001) Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale. Organizational Res Methods 4(1):62\u0026ndash;83. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/109442810141004\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/109442810141004\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClark S (2000) Son Preference and Sex Composition of Children: Evidence from India. Demography 37(1):95\u0026ndash;108. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2648099\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/2648099\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDercon S, Singh A (2013) From Nutrition to Aspirations and Self-Efficacy: Gender Bias over Time among Children in Four Countries. World Dev 45:31\u0026ndash;50. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.12.001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.12.001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDhar D, Jain T, Jayachandran S (2019) Intergenerational transmission of gender attitudes: Evidence from India. J Dev Stud 55(12):2572\u0026ndash;2592\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeorge D, Mallery M (2010) SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0. Pearson\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGravetter F, Wallnau L (2014) Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences. Wadsworth\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGross JJ (2002) Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology 39:281\u0026ndash;291. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0048577201393198\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0048577201393198\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHiggins ET (1987) Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect. Psychol Rev 94(3):319\u0026ndash;340. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKing T, Perales F, Singh A, Gurrin L, Crammond B (2022) Traditionalism vs Egalitarianism: Is there an Association between Gender Attitudes and Mental Health? Australian New Z J Psychiatry 56(7):844\u0026ndash;851. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/00048674211031488\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/00048674211031488\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKira IA, Hanaa S, Bujold-Bugeaud M (2015) Gender Discrimination (GD): A Conceptual Trauma-based Framework for GD and the Development of Gender Discrimination Inventory. Psychology 6:2041\u0026ndash;2070. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2015.616201\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4236/psych.2015.616201\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKulik L (2018) Explaining Egalitarianism in Gender-Role attitudes. Asian Women 34(2):61\u0026ndash;87. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14431/aw.2018.06.34.2.61\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14431/aw.2018.06.34.2.61\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNadeem F, Khalid R (2018) The relationship of gender role attitudes with career aspirations and career choices among young adults. Pakistan J Psychol Res 33(2):455\u0026ndash;471\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eP\u0026eacute;rez-S\u0026aacute;nchez B, Concha-Salgado A, Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Su\u0026aacute;rez A, Juarros-Basterretxea J, Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-D\u0026iacute;az FJ (2021) The Gender Role Attitude Scale (GRAS) as an alternative for the crisis in measurement of attitudes towards gender roles in Latin America: A study in Chilean university students. Anales De Psicologia (Annals Psychology) 37(3):567\u0026ndash;576. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.438431\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.6018/analesps.438431\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRappaport J (1987) Terms of Empowerment/Exemplars of Prevention: Toward a Theory for Community Psychology. Am J Community Psychol 15(2):121\u0026ndash;148. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919275\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/BF00919275\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRussell EJ, DeRubeis J, Gifford A, Royer A, Schaefer J, Odiet E, Stanley G, Dose G (2019) \u003cem\u003eCollege Women\u0026rsquo;s Feminist Consciousness and Perceptions of Parents\u0026rsquo; Gender-Related Attitudes\u003c/em\u003e. [Poster Abstract]. Winona State University, Winona, Minnesota, USA. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://openriver.winona.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012\u0026amp;context=studentgrants2020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://openriver.winona.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012\u0026amp;context=studentgrants2020\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSam S (2019) Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination in relation to Personality Pattern, Adjustment Level, Ways of Coping and Mental Health of Adolescent Girls. Pharma Innov J 8(1):90\u0026ndash;96\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh A, Kumar K, Yadav AK, James KS, McDougal L, Atmavilas Y, Raj A (2021) Factors Influencing the Sex Ratio at Birth in India: A New Analysis based on Births Occurring between 2005 and 2016. Stud Fam Plann 52(1):41\u0026ndash;58. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12147\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/sifp.12147\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteele CM, Aronson J (1995) Stereotype Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of African Americans. J Personal Soc Psychol 69(5):797\u0026ndash;811. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2013) Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeis AS, Redford L, Zucker AN, Ratliff KA (2018) Feminist Identity, Attitudes Toward Feminist Prototypes, and Willingness to Intervene in Everyday Sexist Events. Psychol Women Q 42(3):279\u0026ndash;290. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318764694\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0361684318764694\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZarar A, Gul (2021) Causes and Impact of Gender Discrimination on Women\u0026rsquo;s Development. \u003cem\u003ePakistan Journal of Society, Education and Language\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(2), 145\u0026ndash;154. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://jehanf.com/pjsel/index.php/journal/article/view/468\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://jehanf.com/pjsel/index.php/journal/article/view/468\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"The IIS University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination, Gender Transcendence, Self-Efficacy, Gender Bias, Youth Mental Health","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4926499/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4926499/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examines the relationship between perceived familial gender discrimination (PFGD), gender transcendence (GT), and self-efficacy (SE) among young women. A sample of 568 female university students participated in the study, and data were analysed using correlation, regression, and mediation analyses. Results revealed that PFGD negatively predicted SE, indicating that higher levels of perceived discrimination within families are associated with lower self-efficacy. GT partially mediated this relationship, suggesting that individuals who adopt more egalitarian gender attitudes can mitigate some of the negative impacts of PFGD on SE. The findings support the importance of fostering gender-transcendent attitudes to promote resilience against the detrimental effects of gender discrimination.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Perceived Familial Gender Discrimination and Self-Efficacy: The Mediating Role of Gender Transcendence","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-08-19 02:40:29","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4926499/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"c801d184-246c-41a7-967a-acef38bbaf54","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 19th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":36160792,"name":"Psychology"},{"id":36160793,"name":"Gender Studies"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-08-19T02:40:29+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-08-19 02:40:29","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4926499","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4926499","identity":"rs-4926499","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}