Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15 (1991), 181-201. Printed in the United States of America.

WOMEN’S STUDIES
A Study of Feminist ldentity
Development in Women

Adena Bargad and Janet Shibley Hyde

University of Wisconsin, Madison

The present study investigated the effects of women’s studies cour ,es
on women students’ feminist identity development as defined by Do\ rn-
ing and Roush (1984). in Study 1, the authors operationalized the f ve
stages of the Downing and Roush model. Factor and reliability analy e s
performed in both Study 1 and Study 2 yielded a 39-item, s :If-
descriptive, closed-ended feminist identity development scale (FIDS) in
Study 2, the FlDS was administered at the beginning and end of he
semester to 184 students in introductory women‘s studies courses i nd
39 controls. MANOVA and qualitative data from an open-ended qu 2s-
tionnaire and semistructured interviews revealed that the women‘s sti id-
ies students did experience development in terms of the model’s stag ?s,
while the controls did not. In addition to suggesting a novel approact to
evaluating women’s studies courses, the results provided prelirnin in/
validity for the FlDS and the model on which it was based.

Women’s Studies is the educational strategy of a breakthrough in cons :ious-

ness and knowledge. The uniqueness of Women’s Studies has been a id re-
mains its refusal to accept sterile divisions between the academy and com-
munity . . . between the individual and society. Women’s Studies, tf en, is
equipping women to transform the world to one that will be free 3f all
oppression . . . , a force which furthers the realization of feminist aims.
(Constitution of National Women’s Studies Association, 1982)

The authors would like to thank the professors, teaching assistants, and students who were
involved in this study. Special thanks to the faculty, graduate and undergraduatt students,
and professional clinicians who assisted in writing and evaluating the scale items.
Address reprint requests to: Janet Shibley Hyde, Department of Psychology, Brc gden Psy-
chology Building, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706.

Published by Cambridge University Press 0361-6843191 $5.00 + .OO 181

182 BARCADAND HYDE
In the past two decades, women’s studies programs have become well
established in universities across the country. Their aim, reflecting the
NWSA mission statement, has been to provide students with a nonhierar-
chical learning environment, to promote students’ self-esteem and per-
sonal growth, to present previously ignored or reteach previously misrep-
resented information concerning women across the disciplines, and to
encourage an understanding and a practical adoption of a feminist per-
spective. Today, women’s studies programs at both the undergraduate
and graduate levels continue to flourish, and yet there are few empirical
studies that evaluate the personal impact of such courses on the students
who take them.
The scant research on the effects of women’s studies courses has focused
primarily on three areas: changes in attitudes, changes in educational or
career aspirations, and changes in self-esteem or personality. First, some
studies have investigated attitudinal changes regarding sex-role stereotypes
(Brush, Gold, & White, 1978; Ruble, Croke, Frieze, & Parsons, 1975;
Scott, Richards, & Wade, 1977). These studies used scales such as the
Broverman Sex-Role Stereotyping Scale (Rosenkrantz, Vogel, Bee, Brover-
man, & Broverman, 1968) and the Attitudes Toward Women Scale
(Spence & Helmrich, 1972) specifically to assess the effect of women’s
studies courses on students’ attitudes toward women and sex roles. Gener-
ally, these studies concluded that women students’ attitudes either became
more “liberal” after taking a women’s studies course or that the students’
already progressive attitudes were validated by the course.
Second, other studies have investigated the effects of women’s studies
courses on students’ educational or career aspirations (Ruble et al., 1975;
Stake & Gerner, 1987; Zuckerman, 1983). These studies used various ques-
tionnaires to assess the students’ degree and occupational goals before and
after taking a women’s studies course. Some of these studies concluded
that the women who participated in a women’s studies course exhibited
greater gains in job motivation and job certainty (Ruble et al., 1975;
Stake & Gerner, 1987), whereas other studies obtained more mixed results
(Zuckerman, 1983).
Finally, certain studies have investigated the effects of women’s studies
courses on students’ self-esteem and/or psychological androgyny (Bennet
& Grosser, 1981; Brush et al., 1978; Stake & Gerner, 1987; Zuckerman,
1983), using measures such as the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974),
the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965), and the Performance
Self-Esteem Scale (Stake & Gerner, 1987). This latter scale differs from
measures of general self-esteem in that it measures specifically “subjects’
confidence to perform in achievement situations. . . . (p. 279). These
”

studies, too, drew varying conclusions, reporting evidence of movement

toward psychological androgyny, both increases and decreases in general
self-esteem, and increases in performance self-esteem as the result of tak-
Feminist ldentity Development 183
ing a women’s studies course. Only one study (Brush et al. , 1978) specifi-
cally investigated the effects of women’s studies course(s) on the students’
“commitment to a feminist ideology,” which was defined by “attitudes
toward the social role of women (especially in relation to socialization
practices, marriage, and family patterns), career aspirations, and con-
sciousness of sex bias” (p. 873). This commitment was measured mainly
by the Minnesota Women’s Scale. The authors concluded that the women’s
studies students did exhibit an increased commitment to a feminist ideol-
ogy, as defined by the authors and the scale, particularly those students
who had not questioned traditional women’s roles previous to taking the
course. However, the authors stated specifically that, given the measure
of a “commitment to a feminist ideology” that was used, “it is important
to note that this orientation is concerned only with generalized beliefs
about the definition of the social roles of women and not with the personal
beliefs about the definition of one’s own role” (p. 875). Therefore, none of
these studies have investigated the effects of the women’s studies experi-
ence on the student’s conception of feminism or of the self as feminist,
that is, their feminist identity development.
Downing and Roush (1984) proposed a five-stage model of feminist
identity development in women. The five-stage model was derived from
models of African-American identity development (Cross, 1971, 1978;
Thomas, 1970) and was “based on the premise that women who live
in contemporary society must first acknowledge their struggle with and
repeatedly work through their feelings about the prejudice and discrimina-
tion they experience as women in order to achieve authentic and positive
feminist identity” (p. 702). The model was also based in part on the au-
thors’ clinical experiences and other existing developmental theories re-
garding individual and group consciousness-raising (Avery, 1977; Gurin,
1982; Moreland, 1976). Table 1summarizes the stages of the model. Stage
I: Passive Acceptance describes women who deny or are unaware of sex-
ism, and not only accept sex-role stereotypes, but also find them benefi-
cial. Stage 11: Revelation describes women who, after a gradual series
of consciousness-raising experiences, become sensitized to the pervasive
oppression of women. These women are described as responding to their
revelation with anger and guilt. Stage 111: Embeddedness-Emanation is
characterized by a first phase involving the discovery of sisterhood, an
immersion in women’s culture, and a preference for socializing with
women to the exclusion of men. The latter part of this stage is character-
ized by a more multidimensional perspective and cautious interaction with
men. Stage IV: Synthesis is characterized by a transcendence of traditional
sex roles, a recognition of the positive aspects of being a woman, a bal-
anced self-concept, and a tendency to evaluate men on an individual
basis. Stage V: Active Commitment describes an authentic and effective
commitment to social change and “involves the translation of the newly

Parallels between the identity development stages for women a n d African-Americans
Passive Acceptance
passive acceptance of
traditional sex roles
and discrimination
belief that traditional
roles are advanta-
geous
men are considered su-
perior
Preencounter
the unaware person
acceptance of oppression
as justified
values assimilation into
majority culture
negative self-concept
Source: Taken from Downing and Roush (1984).
Revelation
catalyzed by a series of
crises, resulting in
open questioning of
self and roles and feel-
ings of anger and guilt
dualistic thinking
men are perceived as
negative
Stages for African-Americans
Encounter
~~~
catalyzed by profound
event(s) resulting in
increased awareness
rejection of oppression
feelings of guilt and
anger
Table 1
Stages for Women
Embeddedness- Active
Emanation Synthesis Commitment
characterized by con- development of an au- consolidation of feminist
nectedness with other thentic and positive identity
select women feminist identity commitment to mean-
affirmation and sex-role transcendence ingful action, to a
strengthening of new “flexible truce” with the nonsexist world
identity world actions are personalized
eventually more relativ- evaluate men on an in- and rational
istic thinking and cau- dividual basis men are considered
tious interaction with equal but not the
men same as women
Immersion- Internalization-
Emersion Internalization Commitment
initially characterized development of an inte- commitment of the new
by withdrawal from grated, more positive self to meaningful ac-
the dominant culture self-image tion for the benefit of
immersion in one’s heri- adoption of a pluralistic, the minority commu-
tage and hostility to- nonracist perspective nity
ward whites
eventually greater cog-
nitive flexibility and
pride emerge
Feminist ldentity Development 185
developed consolidated identity into meaningful and effective action”
(Downing 81 Roush, 1984, p. 702). The authors discussed the model within
the context of theories on identity development in general (Erikson, 1968;
Kegan, 1982) and women’s identity development in particular (Cho-
dorow, 1978; Gilligan, 1982).
One study did the initial development and validation of a feminist iden-
tity scale and used the scale to evaluate dating behaviors (Rickard, 1989);
however, the scale was not published, making specific comparisons with
the present study difficult. Our research, done approximately concur-
rently with the Rickard work (1989), both operationalized the Downing
and Roush (1984) model by conducting the preliminary development and
validation of a new feminist identity development scale (FIDS), and used
the scale as a novel means of evaluating the effects of women’s studies
courses. The purpose of this study was, therefore, twofold. The intent of
Study 1 was to develop and evaluate a scale of feminist identity develop-
ment in women as defined by the Downing and Roush model. The result
was a 39-item7closed-ended questionnaire (FIDS). The scale and the ini-
tial validation study are presented here.
In Study 2, the FIDS was administered to women students in three
women’s studies classes at the beginning and end of the semester, in order
to investigate the developmental effects of the women’s studies experience
on the students’ feminist identity. An effort was made to correct some of
the methodological problems common to previous research in this area,
such as sampling from only one women’s studies course, drawing conclu-
sions based only on closed-ended questionnaires, and sample bias due to
self-selection. Study 2 surveyed women students in three different women’s
studies courses; gathered information using the FIDS developed in Study
1, open-ended questionnaires and semistructured interviews with stu-
dents, professors, and teaching assistants of the courses; and included a
control group of women who expressed an interest in enrolling in a wom-
en’s studies course in the future, the majority of whom had at least one
woman professor/teaching assistant that semester.

STUDY 1

Method
Participants. Participants were 156 women students taking introduc-
tory psychology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Of these 156
students, 84% (131) were first year students, 9.6% (15) were sophomores,
5.1 % (8) juniors, and -6%(1) were seniors; 1.9 % (3)were African-Ameri-
can, 5.8 % (9) were AsianlAsian-American, 1.9% (3) were Hispanic,
5.8% (9) were Native American, 82.7% (129) were white, and 1.3% (2)
were of other races. The mean age of the participants was 18.71 (SD =
1.45).
186 BARCAD AND HYDE
Scale development. Five women faculty and graduate students with
backgrounds in psychology andlor women’s studies wrote the original
items to correspond with the model. The item writers read the Downing
and Roush (1984) article and were given a detailed summary of each of
the stages in order to familiarize themselves with the five-stage model.
They were then instructed to write self-descriptive statements that accu-
rately reflected the stage definitions and were applicable to women only.
The 200 items generated, approximately 40 items per stage, were initially
evaluated for ambiguity and redundancy, for failure to characterize accu-
rately the stage for which they were intended, and for whether all aspects
of each stage definition were reflected by the items.
Following the preliminary evaluations, a pool of 163 items remained.
Next, ten women faculty and graduate students with expertise in psychol-
ogy and/or women’s studies rated the items in an effort to assess their face
validity. The raters were given the 163 randomized items in the form of a
10-page survey that listed the stage summaries as they appeared in the
Downing and Roush article (refer to Table 1) across the top of each page.
The raters were instructed to rate each item in terms of which stage they
felt it most accurately characterized. Items for which there was 70% or
greater agreement among the raters were retained. Of the remaining 90
items, 67 had 100% agreement, 15 had 90% agreement, 6 had 80%
agreement, and 2 had 70% agreement. With the intent of retaining 10
items per stage, the 90 remaining items were evaluated again for ambigu-
ity or redundancy and for whether all aspects of each stage definition
were accurately reflected by the items. The resulting scale had 73 items.
Procedure. The 73-item scale was cast in Likert format as self-
descriptive statements to which respondents could agree or disagree using
the following 5-point scale: (1)strongly disagree, (2) disagree, ( 3 ) neither
agree nor disagree, (4) agree, and (5) strongly agree. Administration of
the instrument took place in groups of 10-20. A subset of the participants
(n = 50) completed the scale a second time, 1 week after the initial ad-
ministration, to assess test-retest reliability.

Results

Factor analysis of the data yielded five factors. The resulting scale had 41
items. Items with a test-retest reliability greater than .60 were retained.
At the authors’ discretion, 7 items were added in an attempt to reflect
accurately the implicit theoretical foundation of Stage IV: Synthesis of
the Downing and Roush model -that is, actually labeling oneself a femi-
nist - and to ensure an adequate number of items for each stage. Gener-
ally, these additional items involved specifically labeling oneself a feminist
(i.e. , “I can feel very comfortable identifying myself as a feminist”). The
resulting scale contained 48 items.
Feminist ldentity Development
STUDY 2

The first objective of Study 2 was to cross-validate the factor structure of

the scale developed in Study 1 and to perform further reliability analyses.
The second objective was to employ the final scale as a means of assessing
the feminist identity development of women enrolled in one of three wom-
en’s studies courses for the first time, as compared with a control group of
women not enrolled in a women’s studies course. Three women’s studies
courses- a humanities course, a social science course, and a women’s
health course -were chosen in order to sample across both course content
and instructors (all of whom were women). However, although the
courses differed in specific content areas, all were introductory courses
intended to introduce students to a feminist perspective.

Method
Participants. An initial group of 328 women students enrolled in one
of three women’s studies courses at the University of Wisconsin completed
the pretest. Of those 328 women, 167 completed the retest at midsemester,
providing the data for the cross-validation of the factor analysis and the
reliability analysis; 184 women completed the posttest, providing the data
for the evaluation of the effects of the women’s studies courses on the
students’ feminist identity development. Of these 184 women students,
7.6% (14) were enrolled simultaneously in a second women’s studies
course, 4.3% (8) were women’s studies majors, and 78.3% (144) had
various other majors; 32.1% (59) were first year students, 29.3% (54)
were sophomores, 20.7% (38) were juniors, and 17.9% (33) were seniors;
.5 % (1) were African-American, 2.7 % (5) were AsianIAsian-American,
.5% (1) were Hispanic, and 96.2% (177) were white. The mean age of
the students was 20.7 (SD = 2.55). Control participants were 39 women
students who had been on waiting lists for the women’s studies courses,
did not enroll, and were paid for their participation (n = 12) or were
introductory psychology students who expressed an interest in taking a
women’s studies course in the future and received extra credit points for
their participation (n = 27).
Procedure. As in Study 1, the scale was cast in a 5-point Likert format
as self-descriptive statements to which respondents could agree or dis-
agree. Control participants completed the scale at the beginning, middle,
and end of the semester in small groups, by mail or by individual appoint-
ment. The women’s studies students completed the scale also at the begin-
ning, middle, and end of the semester, but during a class period or at
home, returning it the following class period. At the second administration
of the scale, the participants also completed a separate 10-item question-
naire containing a sample of items from the Crowne and Marlow Social
188 BARCADAND HYDE
Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlow, 1964). At the end of the semester,
teaching teams from two of the three courses participated in semistruc-
tured group interviews. Also at the end of the semester, the professor of
the third course and 20 students from all three courses participated in
semistructured, individual interviews; 88 students completed open-ended
questionnaires.
A factor analysis and a reliability analysis were performed on the mid-
semester data. Following the third administration of the scale, MANOVA
and follow-up Scheffe contrasts were performed on the means for each
course (Courses 1, 2, 3, and controls) for Time 1 (pretest, the beginning of
the semester) and Time 2 (posttest, the end of the semester).

Results
Validation of factor analysis and reliability analysis. Factor analysis
of the Study 2 data yielded five factors using the criterion of the Scree test
(Cattell, 1966). Table 2 shows the factor structure for these five factors
based on varimax rotation, their rotated eigenvalues, and the percent of
variance explained by each factor. A total of 47.2% of the variance was
accounted for by the five factors. An oblique rotation was also performed
and yielded essentially the same results, that is, the same items loaded on
the same factors. Factor-factor correlations ranged from .001 (Stage I1
with Stage IV) to - .41 (Stage I with Stage V). The orthogonal solution is
presented here.
Many of the items loaded high on more than one factor, which is not
surprising given that the stages of the model are in some sense cumulative.
Two of the seven items added at the authors’ discretion in the first phase
of analyses (discussed in Study 1) were verified psychometrically in this
second phase of analysis (as well as through the reliability analysis).
Factor 1 contained items that reflected Stage V: Active Commitment of
the Downing and Roush (1984) model (e.g., “I want to work to improve
women’s status”). The eight items formed a subscale (Subscale 5) with a
reliability (standardized alpha coefficient) of .80.
Factor 2 had items that reflected Stage I: Passive Acceptance (e.g., “I
don’t see much point in questioning the general expectation that men
should be masculine and women should be feminine”). The reliability
analysis of the 12-item subscale (Subscale 1) yielded an alpha coefficient
of .85.
Factor 3 included items that reflected Stage 111: Embeddedness-Emana-
tion (e.g., “Especially now, I feel that the other women around me give
me strength”). The reliability coefficient for the 7-item subscale (Subscale
3) was alpha = 3 2 .
Factor 4 contained items that reflected Stage 11: Revelation (e.g., “Re-
cently, I read something or had a specific experience that sparked my
greater understanding of sexism”). The reliability coefficient for the 7-item
subscale (Subscale 2) was alpha = .75.
 Table 2
Varimax rotated factora structure of the
feminist identity development scale (Items 1-48)
Item Number Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5
1 - .51
2 .55 .33
3 .63 .33
4 .so
5 * 53
6 .77
7 .47
8 .54
9 .39 .41
10 .77
11 .41
12 .49 .52
13 .69
14 .58
15 .45
16 .66
17 .36 .51
18 .31 .49
19 .36 .61
20 .40 .45
21 .38 .53 .38
22 .52
23 .66
24 .56
25 .70
26 .73
27 .38
28 .56
29 .33
30 .37 .52
31 .68
32
33 .72
34 .41 .48
35 .52 -37
36 .73
37 .58
38 .41 .42
39 .67 .35
40 .55 .39
41 .35
42 .34 .37 .31
43 .49
44 .67
45 .32 .30
46 .63
47 .76
48 .51
Eigenvaluesb 13.3 3.4 2.2 1.8 1.7
% Variance Explained 27.8 7.1 4.6 4.0 3.7
'For readibility, only eoefficients .30are shown.
bTheeigenvalues are after rotation.
190 BARCADAND HYDE
Factor 5 had items that reflected Stage IV: Synthesis (e.g., “While I am
concerned that women be treated fairly in life, I do not see men as the
enemy”). The reliability coefficient for the 5-item subscale (Subscale 4)
wasalpha = .65.
In sum, the five stages of the model of feminist identity development
seem to be reflected by the scale items as evidenced by both factor and
reliability analyses. The final scale consisted of 39 items. The Appendix
shows the actual items, grouped by subscaleistage of the model.
Social desirability. One potential concern in the collection of survey
data is the influence of social desirability on people’s ratings of items. The
correlations of subscale scores with social desirability scores were com-
puted based on data from the second administration of the scale. The
results were as follows, none of which were significant: Subscale 1, r =
- .11; Subscale 2, r = .18; Subscale 3, r = .07; Subscale 4, r = .04; and
Subscale 5 , r = .12.
Impact of women’s studies courses. Table 3 shows the pre- and posttest
means by scale for all three women’s studies classes and the control group.
Figure 1 shows the pre- and posttest means by scale for each course and
the controls.
The repeated measures data (pre- and posttest) were analyzed using
a multivariate repeated measures analysis. The repeated measures
MANOVA for Subscale 1 revealed significant main effects for course,
F(3, 174) = 4.20, p < .01, and time, F(1, 174) = 46.04, p < .001, and
a significant interaction, F(3, 174) = 3.53, p < .02. Follow-up Scheffe
comparisons indicated that control students’ scale scores did not differ
significantly from those of the women’s studies students at the pretest.
Scale scores for Courses 1 and 2 differed significantly from pre- to posttest
with movement in the direction of stronger disagreement with the Stage I
items.
The repeated measures MANOVA for Subscale 2 revealed signifi-
cant main effects for course, F(3, 170) = 8.00, p < .001, and for time,
F(1, 170) = 69.68, p < .001, and a significant interaction, F(3, 170) =
9.48, p < .001. Follow-up Scheffe comparisons indicated that controls
did not differ significantly from women’s studies students at Time 1. Scale
scores for Courses 1, 2 and 3 were significantly different from pre- to
posttest with movement in the direction of greater agreement with the
Stage I1 items.
The MANOVA for Subscale 3 revealed significant main effects for
course, F ( 3 , 176) = 3.68, p < .02, and time, F(1, 178) = 8.45, p <
,005, and a significant interaction, F(3, 176) = 6.17, p < .002. Follow-
up Scheffe comparisons indicated again that the controls did not differ
significantly from the women’s studies students at Time 1. Scale scores for
Courses 1 and 2 were significantly different from pre- to posttest, with
movement in the direction of greater agreement with the Stage I11 items.
 Table 3
Pre- and posttest mean scale scores by scale for Courses 1, 2, 3, and controls
Scale 1 Scale 2 Scale 3 Scale 4 Scale 5
Pre Post (n) Pre Post (n) Pre Post (n) Pre Post (n) Pre Post (n)
Course
1 2.065 1.732 (37) 3.361 4.016 (36) 3.015 3.312 (38) 3.837 3.705 (38) 3.483 3.750 (37)
2 2.000 1.775 (72) 3.251 3.762 (69) 3.131 3.276 (72) 3.856 3.869 (72) 3.519 3.609 (71)
3 2.017 1.922 (30) 3.143 3.387 (31) 2.820 2.922 (31) 4.006 4.112 (32) 3.483 3.579 (30)
Controls 2.286 2.175 (39) 3.120 3.169 (38) 2.927 2.879 (39) 3.928 4.077 (39) 3.436 3.353 (39)
192 BARCAD AND HYDE
Stage I: Passive Acceptance Stage II: Revelation

2.4 4 4.1 7

I I
Pie Post Pre Post
Mean subscale 1 scores by course Mean wbscaLe 2 scares by mum
a1 pre- and post-test. at pre- and post-test

Stage 111: Embeddedness-Emanation Stage IV: Synthesis

I
4.2 7

I , I , I
Pre Post Pre Post
Mean subscale 3 SCoIes by course Mean subseala 4 scores by course
at p r s and post-test at p r e and past-test.

Stage V: Active Commitment

3.8

-
-- Course 1
Course2
-*-Course3
-*-Controls
ire cost
Mean subscale 5 scores by course
at pre- and post-test

1.
FIGURE Mean subscale scores by course at pre- and posttests.

The MANOVA for Subscale 4 revealed a main effect for course,

F(3, 177) = 2.72, p < .05, and a significant interaction, F ( 3 , 177) =
3.12, p < .03. However, none of the follow-up Scheffe contrasts were
significant. This inconsistency may have been due to the relatively low
reliability of the scale (alpha = .65) or to various problems associated
with the Stage IV items (to be discussed later).
The MANOVA for Subscale 5 indicated a significant main effect for
Feminist Identity Development 193
time, F(1, 173) = 9.64, p < .003, and a significant interaction, F(3,
173) = 5.50, p < .002. Again, controls did not differ significantly from
the women’s studies students at Time 1. Subscale scores for Course 1
differed significantly from pre- to posttest, with movement in the direction
of greater agreement with the Stage V items.

Qualitative Data

The major themes of the qualitative data are summarized below, includ-
ing responses from open-ended questionnaires, semistructured individual
interviews with students, and semistructured group interviews with the
teaching teams of the women’s studies courses. The open-ended question-
naires and the interviews were done at the end of the semester. In under-
standing the qualitative data, it is important to note two points in particu-
lar. First, almost all of the women commented that the course as a whole
contributed to their resulting conception of themselves as feminists, that
is, not the lectures or discussions or readings alone, but the course taken as
a whole. Second, the students’ definitions of feminism generally ranged
from realizing one’s personal potential as a woman, to attempting to raise
consciousness among friends and family , to public feminist activism.
In response to the question, “Do you think this class had any effect on
whether or not you considered yourself a feminist?” 60.2% (53) of the
students responded “yes.” Many of the students commented that the course
either informed them about feminist issues to which they had never been
exposed previously or that the course validated their already feminist per-
spective. In either case, their experiences in the course admittedly influ-
enced their identifying as feminists. For example:

“I feel I have a better understanding of feminist issues so I can argue for the
feminist cause more effectively, making me more confident in identifying
myself as a feminist.”
“It only strengthened that part of my identity- it didn’t cause it, however.”

A number of the women wrote that the course helped them see feminism
and identifying as a feminist in a more positive light. For example:

“Before this class, I would have never defined myself as a feminist. Before, the
word feminist had negative connotations.”
“This class removed stereotypes associated with the term [feminism] and has
made my concern greater than my fear of being called a feminist.”

Also, a number of women commented that although they supported the

ideas presented during the course, they did not consider themselves femi-
nists. For example:
194 BARCAD AND HYDf
“I would not have said I was [a feminist] in January [at the beginning of the
semester]. Now I guess I am in a way, I definitely support feminism more
than I used to.”

In response to the question, “Do you think that over the course of this
class you went through some different phases of awareness about yourself
as a feminist?” 78.4 % (69) answered “yes.” Their comments ranged from
indications that they had not considered themselves feminists previous to
the class but had eventually come to identify as feminists over the course
of the semester, to feelings of guilt and/or feelings of greater solidarity
with women. For example:

“I went from not thinking about myself as a feminist to identifying as a femi-

nist. ”
“I entered this class with feminist values but was wary of labeling myself as a
feminist. Throughout the course, I was exposed to different spheres of femi-
nism and gradually I have found my niche in the movement.”
“I’m ashamed at how much I didn’t realize, understand.”
“I think I have begun to realize how important it is to have women friends and
to be part of women-only groups . . . in that sense I have become even more
of a feminist, valuing my female relationships even more.”

An equal number of women commented that although they did not yet
consider themselves feminists, they were “headed that direction” as a re-
sult of the course.
In response to the question, “Did this class influence your wanting to be
involved in some community or school activity that focuses on women’s
issues?” 59.2% (45 out of 76) answered “yes.” Many were not public-
ly active at the time but were planning on becoming more activist
in the future. Descriptive data indicated that 7.5% of the women were
active in school or community groups focusing on women’s issues at the
beginning of the semester, while 20.3% were active at the end of the
semester.
Generally, the ideas conveyed during the interviews with the students
were similar to the responses on the open-ended questionnaires and the
quantitative results. The women interviewed confirmed that the course
either resulted in their identifying as feminists or reinforced their already
feminist value systems. Most of the women interviewed commented on
their experiencing enlightenment or heightened awareness as a result of
the course. Some of the women commented not only that they passively
accepted sexism and gender-role stereotypes at the beginning of the course,
but also that they actively resisted the information regarding the oppres-
sion of women when it was presented to them initially. The professors
and teaching assistants indicated that they sensed such resistance, mostly
Feminist ldentity Development 195
early in the course. This kind of resistance clearly reflected an element of
denial related to Stage I: Passive Acceptance.
One issue that may be related to Stage I1 of the model was identified
not by the students, but by the professors and teaching assistants. The
issue was the students’ having experienced a sense of being overwhelmed
or helpless, feelings that women’s studies professors consistently encounter
and try to mitigate. Perhaps a common byproduct of having one’s con-
sciousness raised, this feeling of helplessness might be related to the anger
and guilt characteristic of Stage 11, although Downing and Roush (1984)
did not identify it as such. In terms of the consciousness-raising event(s)
necessary for the revelation experience of Stage 11, the comments of both
the students and the teaching teams suggested that women’s studies is a
vehicle for such revelation. Many of the women commented that they felt
the purpose of the course was to raise their consciousness about oppression,
and the professors and teaching assistants indicated that, indeed, their
purpose was to utilize a feminist perspective to raise the consciousnessesof
their students.
The students indicated a second salient goal of the course was to pro-
mote self-awareness, and the professors and many of the teaching assis-
tants agreed that another of their goals was to empower their students.
This self-awareness seemed characteristic of the strengthening of identity
involved in Stage 111: Embeddedness-Emanation. With this newfound
self-awareness and raised consciousness, many of the women discussed
their need to be around people, particularly women, who shared their
feminist values- also characteristic of Stage 111. A common and related
theme throughout the interviews was the struggle to maintain relation-
ships with friends, lovers, and family members who did not share their
newfound feminist perspective. Downing and Roush (1984) and Gurin
(1982) suggested that this particular struggle is a common byproduct of
having one’s feminist consciousness raised - a struggle particularly related
to Stage I11 of the model.
As in the open-ended questionnaires, the women interviewed com-
mented that the course served to dispel the stereotypes and myths they
held regarding feminism in general, and women’s studies in particular. All
the women felt that the course had a profound impact on their thinking,
expressed how much they enjoyed the course, spoke of their planning to
enroll in women’s studies courses in the future, and commented on the
fact that the course had encouraged their activism, on personal and public
levels. The professors and teaching assistants agreed that the course had a
profound impact on the students’ lives, as evidenced by both journal en-
tries and discussions with students during and after the course. Generally,
these women’s studies students had expressed their having experienced
the lack of awareness characteristic of Stage I: Passive Acceptance, the
enlightenment characteristic of Stage 11: Revelation, the need to spend
time with other feminist women characteristic of Stage 111: Embed-
196 BARCADAND HYDE
dedness-Emanation, and were struggling with questions of how feminism
would fit into their lives - questions that might lay the foundation for
Stages IV: Synthesis and V: Active Commitment.

DISCUSSION

This study reported on the preliminary construction and validation of the

FIDS as defined by Downing and Roush (1984) and its use in studying
the effects of women’s studies courses on students. Preliminary factor and
reliability analyses yielded five subscales consisting of 39 items (see Ap-
pendix).
Three points regarding the analyses are of particular interest. First, the
scale developed in Study 1 provides a new measure of the effects of wom-
en’s studies courses, an index different from previous measures tradition-
ally used in research on women’s studies. Specifically, this scale was in-
tended to measure changes in students’ identity or self-perception, as
opposed to changes in attitudes toward or perceptions of others. However,
Study 1 and Study 2 represent only preliminary scale development and
evaluation. Future research should investigate the construct validity of this
scale, that is, whether this scale actually measures identity development or
attitudes toward the self (Rickard, 1989), as opposed to the development
of attitudes toward other people. Second, it was hypothesized that, be-
cause of the lack of distinctiveness between Stage IV: Synthesis and Stage
V: Active Commitment of the model, many of the items written for Stage
IV would load high on the factor reflecting Stage V of the model, which,
indeed, was the case. As a result, Factor 5 (Stage IV) contained relatively
few items (n = 5). The third point regards the content of three items that
were written to assess with Stage IV, but because the factor analyses
associated the items with the factor representing Stage V, the items were
not considered psychometrically sound. These items were the only ones
that involved identifying oneself specifically as a feminist (e.g. , “I can
finally feel very comfortable identifying myself as a feminist”). Thus, these
items, which seem crucial to a scale of feminist identity development, do
not appear on the FIDS as shown in the Appendix. The five items that
ultimately comprised the Stage IV subscale all had to do with attitudes
toward men, and, in fact, all of the items actually contained the word
“men.” Therefore, future analyses could result in collapsing Stages IV and
V, as it may be the case that labeling oneself a feminist, evaluating men
on an individual basis, achieving an “authentic” feminist identity, and
active commitment to feminism all go together as a single, fourth stage of
the model.
Because of the lack of items conveying explicitly the idea that a woman
labels herself a feminist, the nature of this preliminary scale raises the
question of whether the scale describes feminist identity development ver-
Feminist Identity Development 197
sus the development of a feminist value system, if that distinction can be
made. Indeed, the same question might be raised with regard to the
Downing and Roush model itself, which does not specify adoption of the
label “feminist” as requisite for any of the later stages of the model. In
fact, the qualitative data indicated that many of the students did indeed
adopt the label “feminist” as a result of having their consciousness raised
during the course, while others were still wary of adopting the label de-
spite their agreement with the ideas presented during the course.
It is also important to note that the entire scale developed in this study
directly reflects the Downing and Roush model. Thus, the scale items
reflect both the strengths and the limitations of the model, and the content
of the items themselves should be reevaluated given these limitations.
Again, Downing and Roush do not explicitly state that labeling oneself a
feminist is a requisite part of any of the final stages of the model. This
omission, which is reflected in the preliminary scale developed in Study 1,
raises the fundamental question of the relationship between values, labels,
and identity. That is, does one have to call oneself a feminist in order to
develop a feminist identity? Second, the model might be described as a
liberal feminist and heterocentered model. For example, Downing and
Roush suggested that the immersion in women’s culture and community
to the exclusion of men characteristic of Stage 111: Embeddedness-Emana-
tion is “uncomfortable” (p. 701) for most women. The emergence from
such a state was said to involve a “healthier, multidimensional, adaptive
perspective” (p. 701). The description of the progressive evaluation of men
on an individual basis that characterized the higher stages of the model
may also have limited application to radical andlor lesbian feminist iden-
tity development. The relevance for this particular model to the feminist
identity development of women of color also warrants further investiga-
tion (see, e.g., Henley, Meng, & McCarthy, 1990); Downing and Roush
indicated specifically that their model did not address issues of racial,
class, age, or ethnic differences. Future research on or construction of
models of feminist identity development in women might therefore con-
sider various or multidimensional models that capture the diversity of
women’s experiences with regard to their feminist identity development.
Finally, as with many developmental models, this model does not account
for a woman’s simultaneously being at one stage regarding one particular
issue and another stage regarding a separate issue.
The Downing and Roush model may not be all-inclusive, as no singular
model of feminist identity development could be given the diversity of
the feminist community and varying perspectives regarding the gamut of
feminist issues. Nonetheless, the model does represent a valuable, theoreti-
cal starting point in the area of the development of a feminist identity and
consciousness in women. Because women developed the model and the
scale to correspond with the model, this study can be viewed within the
context of feminist research, both theoretically and methodologically, in
198 BARCAD AND HYDE
terms of women defining their own development and the instruments and
techniques to measure that development.
The quantitative data yielded some particularly noteworthy results.
There were no significant differences at the pretest time between the wom-
en’s studies students and the controls on any of the scales. Previous re-
search found or was concerned with a selection confound, but that prob-
lem was mitigated by including control participants who had also
expressed an interest in taking women’s studies courses. Therefore, signifi-
cant effects can be attributed to the experience of the course specifically,
as opposed to simply an interest in women’s studies courses in general.
The control participants showed no significant differences on any of the
five scales from the beginning to the end of the semester, whereas the
women’s studies students showed significant differences on four of the five
scales from pre- to posttest. These results show remarkable consistency.
They also provide one kind of evidence for the validity of the scale.
The quantitative results can be summarized as follows. Students from
women’s studies Courses 1 and 2 disagreed more strongly with the Stage I
scale items by the end of the semester, indicating development away from
the Passive Acceptance stage. Students from all three women’s studies
courses agreed more strongly with the Stage I1 items by the end of the
semester, indicating the contribution of the women’s studies course to the
revelation characteristic of Stage I1 of the model. Students from women’s
studies Courses 1 and 2 agreed more strongly with the Stage I11 items by
the end of the semester, indicating their heightened feelings of solidarity
with women. The data failed to show changes in Stage IV scores. This
failure may be due to the problems with the conceptualization of Stage IV
and the low reliability of the Stage IV items themselves. Students from
Course 1 agreed more strongly with the Stage V items by the end of the
semester, indicating their increased sense of active commitment to femi-
nism as defined by the model and the scale. The model’s very specific
definition of “active commitment” to feminism simply may not encompass
what the students considered active commitment. Both the descriptive
and the qualitative data indicated that students from all three women’s
studies courses perceived themselves as actively committed to feminism by
the end of the semester. Differences among the courses may be attributed
to differences in course content; however, at the same time, some general-
izations can be made based on the broad sample of course types included
in the study.
In sum, in this study we reported the preliminary development and
validation of the FIDS, including factor and reliability analyses. The scale
was then administered to women’s studies students and a group of controls
to test the model of feminist identity development on which the FIDS was
based as well as to provide a novel approach to the evaluation of the
effects of women’s studies courses. Both the quantitative results and quali-
tative reports support the model of feminist identity development pro-
Feminist Identity Development 199
posed by Downing and Roush (1984), although the results on Stage IV are
equivocal; the results also provide evidence that women’s studies courses
contribute to feminist identity development as outlined by the model.
Future research might investigate the construct validity of the scale devel-
oped here; develop additional models of feminist identity development
that more specifically consider race, sexual orientation, class and age; or
provide longitudinal data over a longer period of time on women’s studies
courses and their relationship to feminist identity development in women.

First draft received: lune 22, 1990

Final draft received: October 22, 1990

REFERENCES
Avery, D. M. (1977). The psychosocial stages of liberation. Illinois Personnel and Guidance
Association Quarterly, 63,36-42.
Bem, S . L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Iounal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
Bennet, B., & Grosser, G. (1981). Movement toward androgyny in college women through
experiential education. The Journal of Psychology, 107, 177-183.
Brush, L. R., Gold, A. R., & White, M. G. (1978). The paradox of intention and effect: A
women’s studies course. Signs, 3, 870-883.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 1,245-276.
Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Constitution of the National Women’s Studies Association. (1982).
Cross, W. E. (1971). Negro-to-Black conversion experience: Toward a psychology of Black
liberation. Black World, 20, 13-27.
Cross, W. E. (1978). The Thomas and Cross models of psychological nigrescence: A review.
Journal of Black Psychology, 5 , 13-31.
Crowne, D., & Marlow, D. (1964). The approval motive. New York: Wiley.
Downing, N., & Roush, K. (1984). From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model
of feminist identity development for women. The Counseling Psychologist, 13,695-709.
Erickson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gurin, P. (1982). Group consciousness.Institute for Social Research Newsletter, 10,4-5.
Henley, N. M., Meng, K., & McCarthy, W. J. (1990, March). Deoelopment of a scale to
measure the diversity of feminist attitudes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Association for Women in Psychology, Tempe, Arizona.
Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Moreland, J. R. (1976). Facilitator training for consciousness raising groups in an academic
setting. The Counseling Psychologist, 6 , 66-68.
Rickard, K . M. (1989). The relationship of self-monitered dating behaviors to level of feminist
identity on the feminist identity scale. Sex Roles, 20, 213-226.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-
versity Press.
Rosenkrantz, P. S., Vogel, S. R., Bee, H., Broverman, I. K., & Broverman, D. M. (1968).
Sex-role stereotypes and self-concepts in college students. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 32,287-295.
200 BARCAD A N D HYDE
Ruble, D. N., Croke, J. A., Frieze, I., & Parsons, J. E. (1975). A field study of sex-role
related attitude change in college women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 5 , 116-
117.
Scott, R., Richards, A., & Wade, M. (1977). Women’s studies as change agent. Psychology
of Women Quarterly, 1,377-379.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). The Attitude Toward Women Scale: An objective
instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary
society. Abstracted in JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2,66.
Stake, J., & Gerner, M. (1987). The women’s studies experience. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 11, 277-284.
Thomas, C . (1970). Different strokes for different folks. Psychology Today, 4 , 48-53, 78-80.
Zuckerman, D. (1983). Women’s studies, self-esteem, and college women’s plans for the
future. Sex Roles, 9,633-641.

APPENDIX
FEMINIST IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT SCALE ITEMS BY SUBSTAGES

Stage 1: Passive Acceptance

1. I don’t think there is any need for an Equal Rights Amendment; women are doing
well.
2. I think that most women will feel most fulfilled by being a wife and a mother.
3. One thing I especially like about being a woman is that men will offer me their seat on
a crowded bus or open doors for me because I am a woman.
4. I’ve never really worried or thought about what it means to be a woman in this society.
5 . If I were married to a man and my husband was offered a job in another state, it
would be my obligation to move in support of his career.
6. I do not want to have equal status with men.
7. I think that men and women had it better in the 1950s when married women were
housewives and their husbands supported them.
8. I don’t see much point in questioning the general expectation that men should be
masculine and women should be feminine.
9. I am not sure what is meant by the phrase “women are oppressed under patriarchy.”
10. I think it’s lucky that women aren’t expected to do some of the more dangerous jobs
that men are expected to do, like construction work or race car driving.
11. Generally, I think that men are more interesting than women.
12. I think that rape is sometimes the woman’s fault.

Stage 2: Revelation

1. I used to think that there isn’t a lot of sex discrimination, but now I know how much
there really is.
2. It only recently occurred to me that I think it’s unfair that men have the privileges
they have in this society simply because they are men.
3. When you think about most of the problems in the world- the threat of nuclear war,
pollution, discrimination - it seems to me that most of them are caused by men.
4. It makes me really upset to think about how women have been treated so unfairly in
this society for so long.
5. Recently, I read something or had an experience that sparked a greater understanding
of sexism.
6. When I see the way most men treat women, it makes me so angry.
7. I am angry that I’ve let men take advantage of me.
Feminist Identity Development 20 1
Stage 3 : Embeddedness- Emanat ion

1. I just feel like I need to be around women who share my point of view right now.
2. Being a part of a women’s community is important to me.
3. My social life is mainly with women these days, but there are a few men I wouldn’t
mind having a nonsexual friendship with.
4. I share most of my social time with a few close women friends who share my feminist
values.
5. Especially now, I feel that the other women around me give me strength.
6. If I were to paint a picture or write a poem, it would probably be about women or
women’s issues.
7 . Particularly now, I feel most comfortable with women who share my feminist point of
view.

Stage 4: Synthesis

1. Some of the men I know are more feminist than some of the women I know.
2. While I am concerned that women be treated fairly in life, I do not see men as the
enemy.
3. I feel that some men are sensitive to women’s issues.
4. Although many men are sexist, I have found that some men are supportive of women
and feminism.
5 . I evaluate men as individuals, not as members of a group of oppressors.

Stage 5: Active Commitment

1. I want to work to improve women’s status.

2. On some level, my motivation for almost every activity I engage in is my desire for an
egalitarian world.
3. I have a lifelong commitment to working for social, economic, and political equality
for women.
4. It is very satisfying to me to be able to use my talents and skills in my work in the
women’s movement.
5. I care very deeply about men and women having equal opportunities in all respects.
6. I feel that I am a very powerful and effective spokesperson for the women’s issues I am
concerned with right now.
7. I am very committed to a cause that I believe contributes to a more fair and just world
for all people.
8. I am willing to make certain sacrifices to effect change in this society in order to create
a nonsexist, peaceful place where all people have equal opportunities.