UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

How men envision themselves as men in the future : a grounded theory Kumar, Rajeena P. 2020

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
24-ubc_2020_may_kumar_rajeena.pdf [ 4.82MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 24-1.0389782.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0389782-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0389782-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0389782-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0389782-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0389782-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0389782-source.json
Full Text
24-1.0389782-fulltext.txt
Citation
24-1.0389782.ris

Full Text

HOW MEN ENVISION THEMSELVES AS MEN IN THE FUTURE: A GROUNDED THEORY  by  Rajeena P. Kumar   B.A., The University of British Columbia, 2014  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Counselling Psychology)   THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver)  April 2020  © Rajeena P. Kumar, 2020  ii   The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the thesis entitled:  How men envision themselves as men in the future: a grounded theory   submitted by Rajeena Payal Kumar   in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Counselling Psychology    Examining Committee: Robinder Bedi, Counselling Psychology   Supervisor  Owen Lo, Special Education  Supervisory Committee Member  Moss Norman, Kinesiology  Supervisory Committee Member  iii  Abstract  Compared to women, men experience many poorer health outcomes including having shorter lifespans, higher rates for all 15 leading causes of death, and greater risk of cancer and heart disease (Courtenay, 2000; Statistics Canada, 2005; Singh, Kochanek, & MacDorman, 1994; Viallancourt, 2010). College aged men experience additional challenges such as dropping out of school more often and engaging more frequently in risky behaviours compared to women (Courtenay, 2000; Oliffe, Galdas, Han, & Kelly, 2013). Research illustrates the adherence to traditional masculine norms contributing largely to men’s poorer life outcomes (Shen‐Miller, Isacco, Davies, St. Jean, Phan, 2013). Deficit models of psychology saturate the literature on men and masculinities to provide insights into men’s experiences and therapeutic interventions, but less attention has been given to the study of strengths and positive emotions. (Kiselica & Englar-Carlson, 2010). Further, research demonstrates the lack of engagement of college aged men when receiving psychotherapeutic interventions (Davies, Shen-Miller, & Isacco, 2010; Kiselica & Englar-Carlson, 2010). By using a positive psychology approach to develop clinical interventions, scholars have found increased engagement of college aged men in counselling (Davies et al., 2010; Kiselica & Englar-Carlson, 2010), but literature describing these approaches is largely theoretical. Following recommendations to build theory on men and masculinities using a positive psychology lens (Issaco, 2015) and noting the existence of a new but elusive concept of possible masculinities, the present study aimed to (a) construct a data-driven theory for explaining how college aged men envision their possible masculinities (i.e., what men want to be in the future), and (b) to contribute theory-driven suggestions for psychotherapeutic interventions for college aged men within a positive psychology framework. Using grounded iv  theory methodology, the Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model (EPMM) emerged from analyzing eight focus groups with 49 college aged men. The EPMM describes the contextual factors and processes contributing to how college aged men envision their possible masculinities and summarizes two types of possible masculinities (i.e., internal and external). Results can be used to expand the theoretical understanding of college aged men, aid in the development of engaging clinical interventions, and improve the current conceptualization of possible masculinities.    v  Lay Summary  Compared to women, men face many worse health outcomes. For example, on average men have shorter lifespans and are more likely to die from cancer and heart disease. College aged men face their own additional challenges including more frequently engaging in riskier behaviour and dropping out of school compared to women. Despite negative health consequences, men are less likely to seek help, and when they do try to get help, practitioners find their engagement during therapy lacking. Research has heavily focused on these toxic outcomes of masculinities rather than exploring how masculinities can be helpful for men. For instance, fatherhood is seen as a positive element of traditional masculinity. This study adds to the literature on understanding how masculinities can be helpful for men by examining possible masculinities (i.e., what men want to be in the future) in order to improve psychotherapeutic interventions that can help men lead healthier lives.  vi  Preface  This thesis is original, unpublished, independent work by the author, R. P. Kumar.  This thesis is based on the data collected by the members of the Men’s Resiliency Project at Western Washington University. This research was approved by the University of British Columbia’s Behavioural Research Ethics Board [certificate #H19-00179]. vii   Table of Contents  Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iii Lay Summary ................................................................................................................................ v Preface ........................................................................................................................................... vi Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ vii List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. xiv List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xv Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... xvi Dedication .................................................................................................................................. xvii Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Problem Statement .......................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Purpose of the Proposed Study ....................................................................................... 6 1.3 Significance of the Study ................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 2: Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Part I – College Aged Men and Masculinities ................................................................ 8 2.2 Part II – Early Understandings of Men and Masculinities ............................................ 12 2.2.1 An Introduction to the Theoretical Understanding on Men and Masculinities ........ 12 2.2.2 Sociobiology/Evolutionary Approach ....................................................................... 14 2.2.3 Psychoanalytical and Psychodynamic Approach ..................................................... 16 2.2.4 Male Sex Role Theory/Gender Role Identity Paradigm ........................................... 19 2.2.5 Gender Schema Theory ............................................................................................. 20 2.3 Part III – A Social Constructionist Turn to Understanding Masculinities .................... 21 viii  2.3.1 Masculinity Ideologies .............................................................................................. 21 2.3.1.1 Power and Privilege. ......................................................................................... 23 2.3.2 Gender Role Strain Paradigm .................................................................................. 26 2.3.3 Gender Role Conflict Theory .................................................................................... 30 2.4 Part IV – Nascent Approaches to Understanding Men and Masculinities .................... 33 2.4.1 Critical Discursive Analytic Approach ..................................................................... 33 2.4.2 Masculine Gender Role Stress .................................................................................. 34 2.4.3 Male Reference Group Identity Dependence ............................................................ 35 2.4.4 Conformity to Masculine Norms ............................................................................... 36 2.4.5 Precarious Manhood ................................................................................................ 37 2.4.6 Masculinity Contingency .......................................................................................... 38 2.4.7 Positive Psychology – Positive Masculinity ............................................................. 39 Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................................. 48 3.1 An Introduction to the Methodology Section ............................................................... 48 3.2 Grounded Theory and Epistemology ............................................................................ 49 3.3 Reflexivity and Theoretical Sensitivity ........................................................................ 52 3.4 An Introduction to the Data .......................................................................................... 55 3.5 Criteria for the Selection of Participants ....................................................................... 56 3.5.1 Phase I ...................................................................................................................... 56 3.5.1.1 Procedure for Participant Recruitment. ............................................................. 56 3.5.1.2 Participants. ....................................................................................................... 57 3.5.2 Phase II ..................................................................................................................... 60 3.5.2.1 Procedure for Participant Recruitment. ............................................................. 60 ix  3.5.2.2 Participants. ....................................................................................................... 60 3.6 Data Gathering Materials .............................................................................................. 61 3.6.1 Materials ................................................................................................................... 61 3.6.1.1 Phase I. .............................................................................................................. 61 3.6.1.1.1 Focus Group Questions. ............................................................................. 61 3.6.1.1.2 Focus Group Facilitators. .......................................................................... 61 3.6.1.1.3 Demographics Questionnaires. ................................................................... 61 3.6.1.2 Phase II. ............................................................................................................. 62 3.6.1.2.1 Focus Group Questions. ............................................................................. 62 3.6.1.2.2 Focus Group Facilitators. .......................................................................... 63 3.6.1.2.3 Demographics Questionnaire. .................................................................... 63 3.6.2 Procedure .................................................................................................................. 64 3.6.2.1 Phase I. .............................................................................................................. 64 3.6.2.2 Phase II. ............................................................................................................. 65 3.7 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 66 3.7.1 Phase I ...................................................................................................................... 66 3.7.1.1 Constant Comparison. ....................................................................................... 66 3.7.1.2 Coding. .............................................................................................................. 67 3.7.1.2.1 Open Coding. .............................................................................................. 67 3.7.1.2.2 Axial Coding. .............................................................................................. 70 3.7.1.2.3 Selective Coding. ......................................................................................... 71 3.7.1.3 Conditional/Consequential Matrix. ................................................................... 72 3.7.1.4 Memoing. .......................................................................................................... 73 x  3.7.1.5 Diagramming.. .................................................................................................. 74 3.7.1.6 Summary of Analysis in Phase I. ...................................................................... 77 3.7.2 Phase II ..................................................................................................................... 78 3.7.2.1 Theoretical Sampling. ....................................................................................... 78 3.7.2.1.1 Theoretical Saturation.. .............................................................................. 80 3.7.2.2 Constant Comparison, Coding, Matrix, Memoing, and Diagramming. ............ 80 3.8 Ethical Issues ................................................................................................................ 80 3.8.1 Phase I ...................................................................................................................... 80 3.8.2 Phase II ..................................................................................................................... 81 3.9 Conditions and Criteria for Rigor and Credibility ........................................................ 83 3.9.1 Conditions to Foster Quality Research ..................................................................... 83 3.9.1.1 Structural Conditions. ....................................................................................... 83 3.9.1.1.1 Clarity of Purpose at Start of Research. ..................................................... 83 3.9.1.1.2 Methodological Consistency and Methodological Awareness.. ................. 84 3.9.1.1.3 Hard Work.. ................................................................................................ 84 3.9.1.2 Personal Conditions. ......................................................................................... 85 3.9.1.2.1 Self-Awareness and Reflexivity.. ................................................................. 85 3.9.1.2.2 Training. ...................................................................................................... 85 3.9.1.2.3 Empathy and Sensitivity to Research Participants. .................................... 86 3.9.1.2.4 Creativity. .................................................................................................... 86 3.9.1.2.5 Desire to Conduct Research. ...................................................................... 86 3.9.2 Criteria for Judging Quality Research ..................................................................... 87 3.9.2.1 Fit and Applicability. ........................................................................................ 87 xi  3.9.2.2 Concepts, Contextualization and Logic. ........................................................... 87 3.9.2.3 Depth and Evidence of Memos. ........................................................................ 88 3.9.2.4 Variation, Sensitivity, and Creativity. ............................................................... 88 Chapter 4: Findings .................................................................................................................... 90 4.1 Theoretical Overview of Envisioning Possible Masculinities ...................................... 90 4.2 Part A: Current Masculinities ....................................................................................... 93 4.3 Part B: Factors Influencing How Men Envision Possible Masculinities ...................... 93 4.3.1 Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory of Human Development ............................ 94 4.3.2 Factors of Envisioning Possible Masculinities ......................................................... 97 4.3.2.1 Individual Factors. ............................................................................................ 98 4.3.2.2 Microsystem Factors.. ....................................................................................... 99 4.3.2.3 Mesosystem Factors. ....................................................................................... 101 4.3.2.4 Exosystem Factors.. ........................................................................................ 102 4.3.2.5 Macrosystem Factors. ..................................................................................... 103 4.3.2.6 Time in the EPMM. ........................................................................................ 104 4.3.2.6.1 Critical Incident(s). ................................................................................... 105 4.3.2.6.2 Chronosystem. ........................................................................................... 106 4.4 Part C: Possible Masculinities .................................................................................... 109 4.4.1 Internal Domain ...................................................................................................... 111 4.4.2 External Domain ..................................................................................................... 115 4.5 Summary of EPMM .................................................................................................... 117 Chapter 5: Discussion ............................................................................................................... 119 5.1 The Emergence of a Core Category ............................................................................ 120 xii  5.2 Triangulation with Extant Theories ............................................................................ 121 5.3 Implications ................................................................................................................. 133 5.4 Limitations .................................................................................................................. 137 5.5 Future Considerations ................................................................................................. 145 5.6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 149 References .................................................................................................................................. 150 Appendices ................................................................................................................................. 176 Appendix A – Informed Consent ............................................................................................ 176 A. 1 Informed Consent, Western Washington University .................................................. 176 A2. Informed Consent, University British Columbia ......................................................... 178 Appendix B - Advertisement for Recruitment ........................................................................ 181 B.1 Recruitment Email, Western Washington University .................................................. 181 B.2 Recruitment Poster, Western Washington University .................................................. 182 B. 3 Recruitment Email, University of British Columbia ................................................... 183 B. 4 Recruitment Poster, University of British Columbia .................................................. 184 Appendix C – Demographics Questionnaire .......................................................................... 185 Appendix D – Focus Group Interview Schedules ................................................................... 186 D. 1 Phase I ......................................................................................................................... 186 D. 2 Phase II ........................................................................................................................ 187 Appendix E – Resources for Participants ............................................................................... 188 Appendix F - Honorarium Form ............................................................................................. 189 Appendix G - Transcription Key ............................................................................................ 190 Appendix H - Additional Examples of Memoing ................................................................... 191 xiii  Appendix I - Screenshots of Analysis Tool: NVivo ............................................................... 194 Appendix J - Screenshots of Analysis Tool: Excel Spreadsheet ............................................ 195 Appendix K - Screenshot of Analysis Tool: Physical Paper Cards ........................................ 196 Appendix L – Additional Examples for the EPMM ............................................................... 197 L. 1 Additional Examples for Part B .................................................................................. 197 L. 2 Additional Examples for Part C .................................................................................. 201 Appendix M – External Audits ............................................................................................... 203  xiv  List of Tables  Table 1. Demographics of Participant Sample, Western Washington University ........................ 59 Table 2. Example Excerpt from Data with Codes ......................................................................... 69  xv  List of Figures  Figure 1. Example of Diagramming during Early Stage Analysis, April 26, 2019 ...................... 75 Figure 2. Example of Diagramming during Middle Stage of Analysis, May 1, 2019 ................... 76 Figure 3. Example of Diagramming during End Stage Analysis, May 4, 2019 ............................ 77 Figure 4. Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model. ................................................................... 92 Figure 5. Bio-Ecological Theory of Human Development. Based on Bronfenbrenner (2005). .... 95 Figure 6. Part B of EPMM, Demonstrating the Individual, Microsystem, Mesosystem, Exosystem, Macrosystem Factors and Critical Incidents. ............................................................................... 98 Figure 7. Part B of EPMM, Illustrating the Chronosystem and Movement Within the EPMM. 107 Figure 8. Part C of the EPMM. ................................................................................................... 111  xvi  Acknowledgements  Thank you to my researcher supervisor Dr. Robinder Bedi, and committee members, Dr. Owen Lo, and Dr. Moss Norman for your continual support and encouragement. Thank you for your time and energy in helping me develop my research competencies and complete this thesis.  Special thanks to Ava Outadi and Tom Douce for their willingness to complete an external audit and provide feedback for the present study.  xvii  Dedication  I dedicate this thesis to my family and friends. Thank you for your immense support and motivation. Thank you for the kind words, the hugs, and the strength to continue.   1  Chapter 1: Introduction  Following a realization that the male gender role has received relatively less direct attention in research compared to the female gender role (Bedi, Young, Davari, Springer, & Kane, 2016; Westwood & Black, 2012), a push has been made to better understand men and masculinities (Isacco, 2015; Thompson & Bennett, 2015). The term “man” typically refers to the human male. A male is defined as having an XY chromosome pair, and a female is defined as having an XX chromosome pair (Rathus, Nevid, Fichner-Rathus, & Herold 2010). Gender refers to “one’s personal, social and legal status as a male or female,” (Rathus et al., 2010, p. 3). Gender identity is an individual’s perception of being a male, female or another gender, and is influenced by both inherent (i.e., biological) and environmental factors (Ghosh, 2015). Gender roles are the expectations in our culture about how males and females are to behave (Rathus et al., 2010). In a variety of contexts, research has demonstrated that men have many poorer life outcomes compared to women such as shorter life spans, higher rates of death for all 15 leading causes of death, and greater risk of cancer and heart disease (Courtenay, 2000; Singh, Kochanek & MacDorman, 1994; Statistics Canada, 2005; Viallancourt, 2010).  Several studies specifically comment on the rising crises of college aged men (Davies, Shen-Miller, & Issaco, 2010; Khan, 2009; Currier, 2013; Kleinfeld, 2009; Kilmartin, 1994; Harris & Edwards, 2010; Harris, 2010; Iwamaoto, Corbin, Lejuez, & MacPherson, 2014; Oliffe, Galdas, Han, & Kelly, 2013). For example, college aged men drop out of school more often than women and engage more frequently in risky behaviours (Courtenay, 2000; Oliffe et al., 2013). College aged men are at a critical developmental period, where their actions can greatly impact their futures. For instance, binge drinking, a common form of proving manhood for college aged men (Davies et al., 2010), can negatively impact present and future employment/career and 2  illness. In acknowledging this disparity between men and women, over the last 30 years in particular, researchers have more closely looked at the concept of masculinities and how it impacts both men and women, including college aged men and women (Connell, 2002, 2014). In doing so, research has made great recent progress into better understanding men and their lived experiences through the lens of the construct of masculinities.  The definition of masculinities has evolved over the last few decades. It is argued that the concept of masculinities has yet to be fully explored and fully articulated and could benefit from further qualitative exploration, theoretical development, and the incorporation of a positive lens (Isacco, 2015) in order to fill in the gaps of theoretical knowledge about men’s gender identity development. Early conceptualizations of masculinities described it as being unchanging and singular (using the singular term masculinity), biologically determined, and consisting of enduring personality traits (Manhowski & Maton, 2010; Terman & Miles, 1936). Over time, new perspectives emerged that suggested that masculinity had social aspects, in addition to biological ones (Levant & Powell, 2017), such as Pleck’s (1981) Gender-Role Strain Paradigm. Present definitions of masculinities have moved away from being biologically determined, singular, and static, to being socially constructed, plural, and dynamic. In addition, some of the newest understandings of men and masculinities emphasize the existence of multiple new masculinities, in addition to its mainstream/traditional understanding (Connell, 2002, 2014). 1  1 The terms “masculinity” and “masculinities” are inconsistently used in the literature. The singular or plural use of the term can be dependent on theoretical perspective. This thesis uses the term that is consistent with the conventions of the theoretical perspective discussed at the time. Additionally, within a theoretical perspective that assumes the existence of multiple masculinities, researchers may still use the singular term to refer to one of the multiple masculinities in their discussion. Overall, this thesis adheres to the perspective that multiple masculinities exist, and by default will use the term “masculinities.” This adherence is consistent with the American Psychological Association’s Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinities and reflects most current understandings of the male gender role (American Psychological Association, 2018). 3  Despite the acknowledgement of the existence of multiple masculinities in more recent accounts, most of the research has continued to examine traditional, singular conceptualizations of masculinity. Usually, these conceptualizations focus disproportionately on the negative impacts men (and women) face as a result of adopting (or attempting to adopt) traditional aspects of masculinity. For example, O’Neil’s (1986) popular Gender Role Conflict Theory focuses on the types of strain men and women experience from adopting traditional aspects of masculinity. The field has characterized theories that emphasize the negative consequences of traditional masculinity as “deficit models” and critique the effectiveness of interventions for men that are based on these “deficit models” of masculinity (Kiselica, Benton-Wright, Englar-Carlson, 2016; Issaco & Wade, 2017). Fortunately, in response to a field saturated with deficit models of understanding men and masculinities, some scholars have begun to investigate the positive aspects of (traditional) masculinity.  Recent research has begun to investigate positive psychology constructs within traditional masculinity. Hammer and Good (2010) found that some aspects of traditional masculinity (i.e., engaging in risk-taking, being status-oriented) were positively associated with courage and resilience. Kiselica and Englar-Carlson (2016) describe an entire approach to studying the positive impacts of a masculine gender role on men. They call their approach Positive Psychology Positive Masculinity and offer specific intervention guidelines to working with men. Around the same time, Davies, Shen-Miller, and Issaco (2010) put forth their own intervention guidelines for working with men that utilized a positive psychology framework called the Men’s Centre Approach. Both approaches (Positive Psychology Positive Masculinity and Men’s Centre Approach) take a clear strengths-based approach to understanding men, but the latter emphasized a future-orientation, called possible masculinities.  4  The concept of possible masculinities was created through clinician experience and related published literature (Davies et al. 2010). Possible masculinities help men explore their future selves as men. Possible masculinities are aspirational and future oriented goals for men’s identity and behaviours based on (a) what men want to be in the future, (b) what men require to meet their developmental needs, and (c) what we, as a community, need from men to foster community safety and health (Davies et al. 2010, p. 348). In incorporating possible masculinities into their intervention efforts, Davies et al. (2010) found promising results. However, relatively little is known about the construct of possible masculinities, thus it needed to be more fully explored systematically and qualitatively in order to better understand how it can be most helpful for men and their development. Issaco (2015) suggested that future research about men and masculinities should employ qualitative methodology, such as grounded theory, to build on or develop theoretical explanations. In other words, Issaco (2015) asserts that the theoretical base for understanding men and masculinities is incomplete, and using qualitative methodology, especially one that fosters the development of theory (i.e., grounded theory) is recommended. This directive definitely applies to the sparse literature using a positive psychology lens to explore masculinities (i.e., possible masculinities). To this researcher’s knowledge, no empirical research has examined the concept of possible masculinities with the explicit intent of advancing its theoretical base (i.e., creating a theoretical model grounded in data). Instead, the extant literature has remained anecdotal and theoretical with the theory not being borne directly from research (i.e., grounded in data), save for one recent example (Molenaar & Liang, 2020) (see Chapter 2: Literature Review).  5  1.1 Problem Statement  The field concerned with the psychology of men and masculinities is lacking theoretical exploration using a positive lens (Issaco, 2015). Because the concept of possible masculinities (as defined by Davies et al., 2010) is in its infancy, and relatively little is known about this apparently important construct, the development of positive and more effective intervention efforts with men is limited. It should be noted that some indirect and sometimes unintentional research on future masculinities has occurred using Markus and Nurius’ (1986) construct of Possible Selves. Direct research on masculinities using Markus and Nurius’ contruct has also focused on very limited and highly specific contexts, for example, males’ future identities and their decisions regarding choir participation (Powell, 2017; Powell, 2015; Freer, 2010; Freer, 2009), limiting generalizability. Nevertheless, the exploration of possible masculinities (and more generally the exploration of men using a positive lens), using an empirical, qualitative approach is needed to further the field of masculinities, which is inundated with understanding masculinities using a negative lens. Deficit models (i.e., a negative lens) of psychology have focused on understanding and treating psychopathology resulting in minimal attention to the “study and promotion of positive emotion, character strengths, and human virtues” (Kiselica & Englar-Carlson, 2010). Given the many negative life consequences men – in particular college aged men – face, any effort to understanding and helping young men is a dire need and approaches based on positive psychology are novel and highly promising (e.g., Kiselica, Benton-Wright, & Englar-Carlon’s [2016] Positive Psychology Positive Masculinity and Davies et al.’s [2010] Men’s Center Approach). 6  1.2 Purpose of the Proposed Study  Combining a call for more qualitative exploration of masculinities, the need to develop theories examining masculinities beyond an exclusive deficit model perspective, and the lack of empirical evidence related to the construct of possible masculinities, the primary aim of the present study was to fully explore the existing, yet elusive concept of possible masculinities by  generating a theory grounded in data that seeks to explain how college aged men envision their possible masculinities (i.e., what men want to be in the future). This study employed Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) approach to grounded theory. In other words, this research added to the concept of possible masculinities by using a qualitative methodology (i.e., grounded theory) that used empirical data to develop theoretical dimensions of an existing concept (i.e., possible masculinities). Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) method includes a fundamental root in philosophical pragmatism. In line with this, a secondary aim of this study was to add to the literature supporting practical intervention efforts by creating a theory that can inform, guide, and help create evidence-based psychotherapeutic approaches with men.  1.3 Significance of the Study   Research has demonstrated the many negative social, health, and life consequences men face, especially college aged men (Khan, 2009; Currier, 2013; Klenfield, 2009; Kilmartin, 1994; Harris & Edward, 2010; Harris, 2010; Iwamaoto, Corbin, Lejuez, & MacPherson, 2014; Oliffe, 2013). At the same time, men are less likely to seek help for their problems (Addis & Mahalik, 2003). Despite this, the male gender role has received relatively less attention when compared to the female gender role (Bedi et al., 2016), leading scholars to make the determination that our understanding of men and masculinities is not fully developed (Issaco, 2015). The present research adds to the theoretical literature on men and masculinities and provides more 7  information and guidance to help prevent negative consequences and to foster positive consequences, leading all men (especially college aged men) to live healthier and enjoyable lives. Specifically, results from the present study can aid in programming efforts with college aged men including developing culturally relevant and male-sensitive counselling interventions and assisting in the training of mental health professionals on how to provide engaging therapies for men. By using a qualitative approach to research, this study was better equipped to capture the unique lived experiences of college aged men, which can be difficult to cultivate using quantitative research, and include that in theory development. 8  Chapter 2: Literature Review   2.1 Part I – College Aged Men and Masculinities  While college aged2 men have unique challenges, some of these challenges overlap greatly with men of all ages. In general, men face greater pressure than women to conform to gender norms (Yamawki, 2010; Vandello & Bosson, 2013). Vandello, Bosson, Cohen, Burnaford, and Weaver (2008) demonstrate the increased pressure men face to demonstrate their manhood and that men experience greater anxiety when their gender identity is threatened. Men who deviate from gender norms are more negatively viewed by both men and women than when women deviate from gender norms (Sirin, McCreary, Mahalik, 2004). Research has specifically examined college aged men’s emotional and physical well-being, especially in relation to traditional masculine gender roles (Courteany, 2000; Davies, McCrae, Frank, Dochnahl, Pickering, Harrison, Zakrzewski, Wilson, 2000). College aged men experience worse health threats compared to college aged women including engaging in more risky behaviours (Courteany, 2000; Davies et al., 2000). It should be noted that much of the scholarship on college aged men and masculinities has been conducted in North America and therefore primarily reflects the gender norms of North American men.   Research demonstrates the many negative consequences that college aged men face are related to traditional gender norms including: hazardous drug and alcohol use, risky behaviour, aggressive behaviour, hypersexuality, and a lack of interest in academics (Khan, 2009; Currier,  2 College aged has been defined to describing the age at which students typically attend higher education institutions. College age is defined as 18-23 (Deil-Amen, 2011).     9  2013; Klenfield, 2009; Kilmartin, 1994; Harris & Edward, 2010; Harris, 2010; Iwamaoto, Corbin, Lejuez, & MacPherson, 2014; Oliffe, 2013). Harris (2010) found that college aged men associate masculinity with being respected, confident, aggressive, tough, competitive, in control, self-assured, assuming responsibility, being heterosexual, and not being feminine (e.g., displaying emotions other than anger, being vulnerable). Behaviours associated with being masculine in this way include binge drinking, playing video games, watching sports, working hard and discussing sexual experiences (Harris, 2010). Turner, Leno and Keller (2013) reported that the highest cause of death for college aged men is accidental injuries (i.e., alcohol-related vehicular deaths and alcohol-related nontraffic deaths), followed by suicide, cancer, and homicide. College aged men have significantly higher rates of completing suicide than women (Turner et al., 2013). These factors (e.g., death rates) are related to the male gender role (Courtenay, 2000).  Many of the negative consequences of masculinity in college aged men pertains to gender normative risky and dangerous behaviour. Collegiate sports and fraternity life on college campuses foster competitive behaviour among college aged men which often generalizes to who can drink the most and who can have the most sex with the most women (Oliffe et al, 2013; Harris, 2010). Iwamoto, Corbin, Lejuez and MacPherson (2014) state that alcohol use and abuse promote risky behaviour, competitiveness, and a desire to win. Vandello and Bossom (2013) describe the greater pressure college men experience to socially demonstrate their manhood in comparison to women, as society typically associates manhood with social factors and womanhood to biological factors. To demonstrate their manhood, college aged men often engage in binge-drinking and hypersexuality (Oliffe et al. 2013; Currier, 2013). Not only are men in this age range more likely to engage in violence impacting their individual health, they are more 10  likely to engage in violence against women and other men. Koss, Gidycz, and Wisniewski (1987) report that over 50% of college aged women experienced sexual violence from men and 25% of college aged men reported engaging in at least one act of sexual aggression from the age of 14 onwards. Schwartz and DeKeserdy (1997) and White and Smith (2004) found similar patterns of sexual aggression by college aged men in their respective studies. The restriction of emotions, which are viewed as masculine by most men (Khan, 2009), impacts the appropriate expression of emotion, leading to aggression, and eventually violence (Khan, 2009; Kilmartin, 1994). If college aged men were to express any emotion, they were more likely to express anger and aggression, as they think it is more acceptable (i.e., more masculine) (Davies et al., 2000). Oliffe, Galdas, Han, and Kelly (2013) show that depression in college aged men is frequently demonstrated through anger. However, after expressing aggression, college aged men were noted to usually feel worse afterwards (Davies et al., 2000), and had increased feelings of shame and the tendency to isolate themselves from embarrassment (Oliffe et al., 2013). College aged men also have a tendency to isolate themselves if they felt they did not measure up to society’s definition of what it means to be a man (Oliffe et al., 2013). College aged men in Davies et al. (2000)’s focus groups reported some healthy coping strategies to deal with their concerns (e.g., physical activity, talking to friends and family, listening to music and playing video games) but these were much less prevalent than destructive coping strategies (e.g., smoking, drinking, bottling emotions and expressing emotions through aggression). Traditional masculinity ideals (i.e., self-reliance, independence, being physically and psychological healthy) are incompatible with help seeking behaviours, leading to the underutilization of mental health services by college aged men (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Courteany, 2000).  11  The tendency to seek out academic help is also lower in college aged men when compared to women, in part, due to the lower expectations college men hold for themselves (Khan, 2009). In comparison to young women, young men are less likely to attend college due to a belief that a college education is not essential (Khan, 2009). Kleinfeld (2009) found that women attend college to increase knowledge, contribute to society and have careers, whereas men go to college primarily to enhance earning potential, which is consistent with traditional male norms of having a high status in society, being competitive, and being respected (Harris, 2010; Davies et al. 2000).  Research has also examined minority men’s unique challenges during college age. Harris (2010) points out that ethnically diverse men in college usually feel additional pressure to maintain high levels of (traditional) masculinity to compensate for not being a part of the dominant European ethnic heritage. Homosexual and bisexual college men commented on the difficulty of defining what it means to be a man for themselves, as heterosexuality is associated with (traditional) masculinity (Harris, 2010). These minority men (i.e., ethnically diverse and homosexual and bisexual men) were also less likely than other college men to seek out help because they felt that they may not be understood (Davies et al. 2000) or be discriminated against (Khan, 2009) by mental health professionals.  In recognizing that college aged men are facing a health crisis, and are reluctant to seek help (Issaco, 2015), interventions targeted to college aged men have been created, but have been largely unsuccessful (Davies et al. 2000; Kiselica, Benton-Wright, Englar-Carlson, 2016). Formal clinical guidelines for working with boys and men have been recently developed (American Psychological Association, 2018), but Davies et al. (2000) highlight the unique challenges college aged men face regarding receiving help that must be considered. For example, 12  Davies et al. (2000) pointed out that many college aged men are unaware of the services available to them on school campuses. Davies et al. (2000) offer suggestions to increase the chances that college age men would receive help: offering outreach services, incentives for participation (e.g., extra school credit, food), phone counselling (to foster anonymity), labelling services in a positive way, and using peer models. Scholars have begun to use interventions with college aged men using a positive psychology approach (i.e., focusing on the benefits of adopting traditional masculine norms) (Davies et al. 2010; Kiselica et al. 2016).  Davies et al. (2010) connect their positive psychology approach to possible masculinities and their promise for developing effective therapeutic interventions with college aged men.  Before a closer look is taken of the relatively nascent concept of possible masculinities (first described in 2010), a look at the theoretical research leading up to a positive psychology approach to men and masculinities is warranted to understand the context in which the research problem (i.e., lack of qualitative research providing deeper descriptions using a positive lens on men and masculinities) exists. Historical and contemporary approaches to understanding men and masculinities are discussed first.  2.2 Part II – Early Understandings of Men and Masculinities  2.2.1 An Introduction to the Theoretical Understanding on Men and Masculinities  The last thirty years of the scholarship on men and masculinities has spanned several epistemological and ontological traditions. Early understanding of men and their behaviour emerged from sociobiological and psychoanalytic perspectives. These perspectives viewed the male gender role (or more accurately, male sex role, given the perspectives considered), as essentialist. In other words, singular conceptualizations of masculinity were proposed, usually in opposition to the female sex role. In the 1970s, the ideas about men took a turn in what Smiler 13  (2004) calls the “Androgyny Movement” (p.17). The influence of culture was underscored by Bem’s (1974) “Gender Schema Theory.” She countered the bipolarity between masculinity and femininity that existed in the field at the time. Instead, she understood masculinity and femininity as dimensions that both men and women could exemplify. This part of the literature review focuses on early theories and models of masculinity, including sociobiological/evolutionary approaches, psychoanalytic and psychodynamic approaches, Male Sex Role Theory/Male Gender Role Theory, and finally the Gender Schema Theory.   Since the 1980s, research about masculinities has begun to predominantly follow a socially constructionist tradition. The focus of the research prior to the 1980s emphasized stereotypical (i.e., traditional) conceptualizations of masculinity. Implications of adopting (or attempting to adopt) traditional male gender norms began to be more frequently examined at this time (and continue to be explored today). In line with this, the next section of the review begins with a discussion of masculinity ideologies (a concept that highlights the socially constructed nature of gender ideologies) and then provides an overview of the major theoretical approaches that focus on traditional male gender norms: Gender Role Strain Paradigm and Gender Role Conflict Theory.    The next section of the literature review looks at the most popular nascent theories of masculinities that have appeared more recently. The following theories and approaches are reviewed: Critical Discursive Analytical Approach, Masculine Gender Role Stress, Male Reference Identity Dependence, Conformity to Masculinity Norms, Precarious Manhood, Masculinity Contingency, and Positive Psychology – Positive Masculinity. The fifth and final section of this chapter revisits the concept of Possible Masculinities, examines it in depth, and introduces the current study and the rationale for it. 14  2.2.2 Sociobiology/Evolutionary Approach  To understand social behaviours using a sociobiological approach, researchers examined sex differences in males and females. Early conceptualizations of what is means to be a man or woman were inextricably related to biological (hormonal and chromosomal) sex differences. In doing so, sex and gender were seen as one, and male characteristics were understood in opposition to female characteristics. Differences in biological differences (i.e., physical characteristics) led to differences in height, weight, muscularity, genitalia, and secondary sex characteristics (such as breasts and facial hair) (Kilmartin, 2010). Attaining these physical characteristics were related to what it meant to be a man. In addition to physical characteristics, certain social behaviours were seen as unique to men and women and helped to demarcate masculinity at the time.    Biological differences in genetic and hormonal makeup, which have been shaped through many years of evolution (Buss, 1999; Darwin, 1859), are seen to powerfully influence social behaviour, especially sexual behaviours. Using an evolutionary lens, the drivers of behaviour are related to the survival of the species, and if a particular behaviour helps with the survival of an organism, the underlying genes of that behaviour are propagated into the species (Wilson, 1975). Sex differences in behaviour are due to differences in males and females’ reproductive investment and reproductive strategies (Daly & Wilson, 1983).  Reproductive investment, the amount of time and resources expended to produce offspring, impacts reproductive strategies (i.e., patterns of behaviour used to ensure genes are passed on) (Daly & Wilson, 1983). Males and females differ in their reproductive investment. Male’s reproductive investment is substantially less than females. Males need seconds to contribute millions of sperm several times a day throughout their entire lives. Whereas females 15  produce one egg per month, carry a fetus for nine months (during which they are unable to become pregnant again), have limited child bearing years, and are tasked with feeding (i.e., breastfeeding) and primarily protecting infants. (Daly & Wilson, 1983). These differences in investment have led to differences in male and female reproductive strategies.  According to the sociobiological and evolutionary approach, the males’ strategy becomes to impregnate as many females as possible while using aggression and dominance behaviours to prevent other males from occupying potential female partners (Daly & Wilson, 1983). Females’ strategy becomes to carefully choose sexual partners who provide superior genetic material (for survival) as well as partners who will help with rearing her offspring (Daly & Wilson, 1983). These differences in reproductive strategies offer biologically based differences in males and females’ social behaviours (Daly & Wilson, 1983). These behaviours are often used to characterise what it means to be a man and woman.   In considering biological and evolutionary drivers of behaviour, men and women become characteristic in certain stereotypical ways. Kilmartin (2010) describes that when using an evolutionary approach, men are characterised as aggressive, driven, immoral, impulsive, uncaring, unfaithful, distrustful, jealous, promiscuous and cruel. Their primary motivation is to impregnate as many women as possible and fight off other men to do so. Alternatively, women are seen as morally superior and more civilized (Gilder, 1986). Females are responsible for maintaining social order and taming the “barbaric nature” of males (Kilmartin, 2010, p. 61).  Kilmartin (2010) outlines several limitations to conceptualizing what it means to be a man solely through a sociobiological lens. The first limitation is that sociobiological research methods are simplistic. Goldfood and Neff (1987) describe that sociobiologists typically hold social variables constant when testing their theories. This limits the potentially powerful 16  influence of social variables, such as dominance hierarchies and coalition formation (Goldfoot & Neff, 1987; Kilmartin, 2010). Kay and Meikle (1984) describe that the generally accepted understanding of behaviour is not solely rooted in biology. In other words, socio-cultural influences are important, but biology creates predispositions in men to behave in a certain way. The second limitation is that sociobiological logic is circular (Kilmartin, 2010). Fausto-Sterling (1992) state that in sociobiology, an assumption is made that universal behaviours are genetic, and thus genetic behaviours are universal. The third and fourth limitations state that sociobiology selectively includes supportive data and that there is a failure to consider alternative explanations of sex differential behaviour (Kilmartin, 2010). Bleier (1984) lists many examples that appear to be theoretically sound using a sociobiological approach but are not empirically supported (e.g., homosexuality). Sapolsky (1997) writes about how hormonal explanations are accepted over social explanations in testosterone release. Kilmartin’s (2010) final set of limitations include how sociobiology’s arguments are used to justify the maltreatment of women. He further explains that these arguments normalize and excuse destructive aspects of the male gender role (Kilmartin, 2010). Psychoanalytical approaches begin to look at relational influences combined with biology to explain gendered behaviour.  2.2.3 Psychoanalytical and Psychodynamic Approach  Psychoanalytic approaches to understanding masculinity combine innate biological and psychological instincts with childhood experiences. Specifically, the psychoanalytic approach emphasizes the importance of biological processes, unconscious processes, internal conflict and developmental experiences (May, 1986; Kilmartin, 2010). Men’s understanding of themselves as men, and the primary motivators for their behaviour, are seen as largely unconscious and the result of his relationships with his caregivers (Kilmartin, 2010). Sigmund Freud’s Personality 17  Theory and his Model of Psychosexual Development, as well as Ego Psychology are the best examples of contributions to understanding masculinity using the psychoanalytical approach.   Freud’s Personality Theory highlights innate biological processes as drivers to psychological processes (Hall, Lindzey, & Cambell, 1998). These innate biological processes include instincts for hunger, thirst, need for oxygen, maintaining body temperature, aggression and reproduction (Hall, Lindzey, & Cambell, 1998; Kilmartin, 2010). The way a person expresses their unconscious sexual and aggressive instincts is related to their personality (Hall, Lindzey, & Campbell, 1998). The three components of the psyche are the Id, Ego, and Superego. The Id is home to the biological based sexual and aggressive instincts and is seen as impulsive. The Ego develops to help an individual organize their world. It is the more rational and realistic aspect of the psyche. Finally, the Superego develops to balance the Id and Ego (Hall, Lindzey, & Campbell, 1998). Boys’ experience with their father impacts the development of the Superego and thus impacts the social development of a boy. Poor Superego development results in a psyche that is primarily operating on the Id, and thus gives into innate biological drives (aggressive and sexual ones). Ideal Superego development results in a psyche that is able to balance the Id and Ego, resulting in a responsible, dedicated, hardworking and caring man (Hall, Lindzey, & Campbell, 1998, Kilmartin, 2010). In this way, the development of the psyche directly impacts how a man behaves. Freud’s Model of Psychosexual Development further adds to an explanation of the development of masculinity.   Freud’s Model of Psychosexual Development describes stages of development that include conflicts that must be resolved for normal development (Hall, Lindzey, & Campbell, 1998). Of the five stages of psychosexual development, the phallic stage is the most relevant when understanding men and their behaviours. According to Freud, during the phallic stage, 18  children develop a sexual interest with the penis and experience castration anxiety. The major conflict that must be resolved during this stage is the Oedipus conflict. When this conflict occurs, the child experiences unconscious sexual feelings for their other sex-parent. At the same time, they begin to view their same-sex parent as someone who threatens their attention from the other-sex parent (Hall, Lindzey, & Campbell, 1998). To resolve this conflict, a boy must identify with his father and redirect his sexual interest from his other-sex parent to a more appropriate target (e.g., girls his age). If the father is caring and attentive, the boy’s castration anxiety will be eased, and he will be able to progress more easily to the next stage of development. If his father is not caring and attentive, the child’s conflict will not be resolved. Thus, he will continue to be fearful (i.e., have castration anxiety) and have a less strong sense of his masculinity. His resulting behaviours will include being aggressive to defend against his castration fears and denigrate women to bolster his masculinity. In this way, a man’s masculine behaviours result from instincts (biology) and his childhood experiences (relationships with caregivers).  Karen Horney reconceptualised Freud’s ideas to posit that men have deep rooted fears that a woman can adversely impact their self-respect, penis, and manhood. She further stated that men fear their penis is inadequate and thus their masculinity is always precarious. Two patterns of behaviours then result: withdrawing or compensating. These behavioural patterns contribute to reinforcing a patriarchal society and fosters aggression towards women (Kilmartin, 2010).  In contrast to Freud’s and Horney’s perspectives, Ego Psychology conceptualizes the development of a gender identity as a result of a child’s interactions with the child’s parents, especially the level of separation from them. This theory proposes that boys separate from their mother by putting up psychological barriers. These barriers include avoiding feminine experiences. Men are met with anxiety if they have a feminine experience (Kilmartin, 2010).  19  More modern theories within a psychodynamic paradigm relevant for understanding masculinity also exist. They are based in Object Relations and Self-Psychology perspectives (Brooks & Elder, 2015). For example, from an Object Relations perspective, Diamond (2004) describes the beginning of a boy’s self-identification as a boy being when his mother begins to relate to him as a male person of another sex. For example, from a Self-Psychology perspective, Krugman (1995) describes feelings of shame that occur when a boy does not attain male gender role ideals. In this example, the feelings of shame impact the development of a healthy sense of self.  There are several limitations with the psychoanalytical approach. Primarily being, much of Freud’s work has been proven to be wrong and based on his own personal experiences. While his original ideas are largely discredited, his legacy must be acknowledged as an early contributor to exploring gendered behaviours. The major limitation with recent psychodynamic approaches to understanding men and masculinity is the lack of an empirical base. Before turning to another major paradigm in understanding of men and masculinities, it is important to consider some of the literature on sex difference that contributed to understanding masculinity as biologically driven and in opposition to femininity.  2.2.4 Male Sex Role Theory/Gender Role Identity Paradigm   Psychoanalytic and psychodynamic theories paved the way to describing masculinity using the “Male Sex Role Theory” (Pleck, 1987). Gender Role Identity Paradigm is also another term to describe this theory. In this theory, to become mature, biological males seek attributes that demonstrate their biological identity (Pleck, 1987, Smiler, 2004). In other words, people are assumed to have a drive to form a gender identity that is consistent with their biological sex for optimal personality development (Levant, 1992). Further, masculinity is viewed as a single 20  construct, which opposes femininity. Masculine attributes are assumed to be inherent. The ideal man is seen as active, rational, strong and community oriented, (Terman & Miles, 1936, Smiler, 2004). Men who are unable to attain ideal male attributes are seen as feminine, hypo-masculine, and would eventually suffer from poor health outcomes (Smiler, 2004, Pleck, 1987, Terman & Miles, 1936). Male Sex Role Theory is inherently empirical (Smiler, 2004). Terman and Miles (1936) published the first psychological inventory of masculinity. This inventory coded masculinity and femininity as opposite constructs. Masculinity was conceptualized as powerful, athletic, steady, and self-confident (Morawski, 1985).  While considered a theory that was developed empirically, in her literature review, Constantinople (1973) found that measurement tools at the time were largely inadequate. She found that there was enough evidence available that point towards separate masculinity and femininity dimensions, even though most measurement tools at the time made the assumption that a masculinity-femininity bipolarity exists. She also did not find poor health outcomes resulting from cross-sex identification (Constantinople, 1973; Smiler, 2004). Constantinople’s (1973) review brought light to the limited utility of measurement tools assuming a masculinity-femininity bipolarity. This substantial critique paved way to what Smiler (2004) calls “The Androgyny Movement,” where an understanding of men and masculinities began to take into account the influence of culture and softened its position on the idea that masculinity and femininity are oppositional, unipolar constructs.  2.2.5 Gender Schema Theory  In the 1970s, Sandra Bem offered a cognitive development model to explain the acquisition of men’s and women’s gender roles (Bem, 1974; Bem, 1979). She described “androgyny” as the ideal for both men and women, thus dissolving the assumption that 21  masculinity and femininity exist as bipolar opposites (Bem, 1979). Bem’s model (1979) also emphasizes the importance of culture on the construction of gender roles. She explains that “largely as a result of historical accident, the culture has clustered a heterogeneous collection of attributes into two mutually exclusive categories, each category considered both more characteristic of and more desirable for one or the other of the two sexes” (Bem, 1979, p. 1048). Children learn these categories from their adult models (Smiler, 2004). Bem’s (1974, 1979) explanation for how gender roles are acquired led research to begin incorporating the importance of sociocultural forces in their conceptualizations of masculinity. Masculinity as an ideology was the next significant development in understanding gender.  2.3 Part III – A Social Constructionist Turn to Understanding Masculinities  2.3.1 Masculinity Ideologies   Masculinity ideologies are defined as, “a body of socially constructed ideas and beliefs about what it means to be a man and against which men are appraised between their communities” (Thompson & Bennett, 2017, p. 47). Masculinity ideology emerged from two social constructionist traditions: that knowledge is influenced by social context (Mannheim, 1936; Berger & Luckmann, 1967) and that masculinity is a “property of the collectives and institutions that have the effect of subordinating women and some men” (Thompson & Bennett, 2017, p. 47). In other words, masculinity is not a psychologically and biologically static quality existing within an individual. Further, because masculinity is dependent on context, it is not singular; there are many masculinities.   Within these multiple ideologies, there exists a mainstream (i.e., traditional) masculinity ideology. In 1976, Brannon provided a theory of the American culture’s mainstream masculinity 22  ideology. He proposed four cannons of American mainstream culture: (a) no sissy stuff (i.e., avoidance of anything remotely feminine by boys and men), (b) the big wheel (i.e., a focus of achievement by boys and men to be respected and admired), (c) the sturdy oak (i.e., the expectation that boys and men calmly solve difficult problems without help), and (d) give ‘em hell (i.e., boys and men’s preference for risk-taking, adventure, and use of violence if necessary).   There is another popular view of mainstream masculinity. The term “hegemonic masculinity” was originally conceptualized by Connell (1987, 1995) as the most mainstream ideology of masculinity. That is, this is the masculinity that most people think of when the word masculinity is used. This mainstream ideology is not necessarily the most prevalent in society, or the most powerful/influential (Connell, 1987, 1995). In other words, the masculinity that most people think of when the word masculinity is used is not necessary the masculinity that is demonstrated in society with the most frequency. Hegemonic masculinity exists within the hierarchical power relationships between men and women (and between men and men). The context determines the hegemonic masculine ideology in a group of people. For example, Bourgois and Schonberg (2007) examined the different masculine ideologies between White and African Americans who were homeless, heroin users. African American users viewed passive begging as relatively feminine compared to White Americans, who viewed it as self-reliant and therefore more masculine (Bourgois & Schonberg, 2007).   Acknowledging that multiple masculinities exist does not mean that these masculinities can be easily sorted or categorized by culture, generation, class, or ethnicity. This “categorical reductionism” or “categorical essentialism” (Thompson & Bennett, 2017, p. 52) dilutes the variations within the categories. For example, Duneier’s (1992) exploration of African American 23  masculinities demonstrated differences in ideologies based on older working-class African American men and younger ones.  2.3.1.1 Power and Privilege. Liu (2017) defines a person’s privilege as “the perception of choices and opportunities in a given context as well as an individual’s expression of rights and opportunities afforded to him/her/them in our society,” (p. 349). Further, privilege is the entitlement and unearned authority of individuals to maintain attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours that support oppressive power structures (Liu, 2017; Palmer II, 2018). Privilege is described as “invisible,” (Coston & Kimmel), 2012, p. 97). In other words, when one is privileged, they are not easily able to observe the benefits afforded to them because of that privilege. In psychology, efforts have been made to make privilege more salient by using tools such as McIntosh’s (1988) “Invisible Backpack” and the “Male Privilege Checklist,” (Coston & Kimmel, 2012).  The definition of privilege itself in psychology has yet to be concretely defined (Liu, 2017). Much of the time, there is an adherence to a simplistic and binary view of privilege. In other words, you either have privilege or you do not. Taken further, if you are a man, in some ways you are privileged. In some ways, gender affords men with elements of privilege, but the concept of intersectionality complicates this binary understanding of privilege. Intersectionality (i.e., a combination of social factors) can impact your degree of privilege. Some of these factors include race, class and gender. In this way, some men may have more privilege than others. Coston & Kimmel (2012) explore the dynamics of having privilege in one area but being unprivileged in another area for men.  The differences in the degree of privilege men experience is documented. Gelfer (2017) discusses how men feel their position in society is in danger for many reasons, such as being 24  unemployed or having health problems, making having male privilege unrealistic. Gelfer (2017) explores how a man can simultaneous feel powerless/less privileged, yet still enjoy privilege as a group. Using economic class as an example, he describes how on a continuum of privilege, men as a group enjoy relatively more privilege than women. He calls this the systemic experience of privilege. But there can be instances where a woman with high class, can enjoy more class-related privilege than a man. In this way, the lower-class man feels underprivileged, which is his individual experience of privilege.  Coston and Kimmel (2012) discuss that for men, taking away aspects of privilege can be perceived as being less of a man. For men, the site of their privilege is often their masculinity (Coston & Kimmel, 2012). “For marginalized men, their masculinity…is targeted as grounds for exclusion from privilege,” (Coston & Kimmel, 2012, p.98). In other words, some men who feel marginalized may feel like less of a man and perceive they are experiencing less privileges as a man. Coston and Kimmel (2012) state that these men still enjoy the benefits of male privilege (as a group), but these privileges are less visible. While men benefit from gender privileges, other factors can impact this privilege.  Gelfer (2017) demonstrates how intersectionality, specifically economic class, can impact an individual’s degree and experience of privilege.  Coston and Kimmel (2012) provide other examples of factors that can impact a man’s privilege: bodily status and sexuality. Regarding bodily status, Coston and Kimmel (2012) discuss how disabled men are less privileged compared to able-bodied men, as they do not meet society’s idealized standard of “appearance, behaviour and emotion for men” (p. 101). Regarding sexuality and sexual orientation, Coston and Kimmel (2012) describe how homosexual men are less privileged than heterosexual men due to society’s view of them as “effeminate” (p. 106).  Ethno-racial identity is another factor that can impact a 25  man’s privilege. Race impacts privilege through stigma and status (Wilkins, 2012). There is a body of scholarship on the impact of “white male privilege” on women and non-white men (Liu, 2017). There is a smaller body of literature discussing different privileges afforded within minority races (e.g., Wilkins, 2012).  A person’s privilege can be impacted by multiple factors including gender, sexuality, body status, ethnicity and class. By acknowledging these intersectionalities, the concept of privilege becomes more nuanced and complex. Men’s privilege then is not just influenced by gender, but of a combination of multiple factors. For example, “a gay white male might receive race and gender privilege, but will be marginalized by sexuality,” (Coston & Kimmel, 2012, p.109).   Despite the preceding discussion of the existence of multiple masculinities within different contexts, most of the research on the measurement of masculine ideologies has been focused on traditional masculine ideology, or more specifically, the traditional American masculine ideology. Thompson and Bennett’s (2015a) review of 16 measures of masculinity ideologies identified the following ten cannons within the measures: (a) relational power, (b) importance of work/breadwinning, (c) being respected, (d) primacy of avoiding femininity, (e) control of emotionality, (f) toughness/self-reliance, (g) physical toughness/violence, (h) risk-taking, (i) (hetero)sexuality, and (j) heterosexism (Thompson & Bennett, 2017). Research is needed to develop measures of non-traditional masculinities, as in their 2015 review, Thompson and Bennett could not identify even one (Thompson & Bennett, 2017). In 2017, Kaplan, Rosenmann, and Shyhendler published an investigation into nontraditional ideologies in attempt to create a quantitative model of a therapeutic new masculinity ideology. Kaplan et al. (2017) identified five themes of non-traditional masculinities: (a) holistic attentiveness, (b) questioning 26  of male norms, (c) authenticity, (d) domesticity and nurturing, and (e) sensitivity to male privilege. They created a new masculinity inventory based on these themes. Nevertheless, Thompson and Bennett’s (2017) recommendation describes the literature’s focus on traditional masculinity, including being consistent with a major approach called the Gender Role Strain Paradigm. This approach is discussed next.  2.3.2 Gender Role Strain Paradigm  The Sex Role Strain Paradigm (Pleck, 1981), later renamed as the Gender Role Strain Paradigm (GRSP) (Pleck, 1995), emphasizes the negative consequences and difficulties in conforming to a gender role. The GRSP has become the dominant approach to conceptualizing masculinity (Levant & Powell, 2017) in psychological literature. In the GRSP, biological differences between men and women are recognized, but are not considered primarily responsible for what is considered masculine or feminine (Levant, 1992; Pleck, 1981). GRSP emphasizes the social and psychological construction of gender roles (Pleck, 1981). The paradigm relies on the dominant masculine stereotypes as explained by Brannon (1976). Gender roles are operationalized by gender stereotypes (Pleck, 1981). In other words, the roles that society ascribes to men and women are based on an over-generalization/over-simplification of how men and women should behave. According to the GRSP, gender roles consist of some dysfunctional elements that lead to strain (Pleck, 1981). Pleck states that the contradicting and inconsistent demands of masculinity, concerns about violating masculine gender norms, and historical changes are some of the factors that are responsible for the strain that men feel when attempting to enact and enacting masculine gender roles (Pleck, 1981, Levant, 1992).  27   Pleck (1981) put forth the following ten propositions for the GRSP: (1) gender role stereotypes and norms operationally define contemporary gender roles, (2) gender roles are contradictory and inconsistent, (3) persons who violate gender norms are proportionally high (i.e., many people do not conform to gender norms), (4) negative social consequences result from the violations of gender roles (5) negative psychological consequences result from the violation of gender roles, (6) actual or imagined violation of gender roles leads to people overconforming to them, (7) males suffer more severe consequences for violating gender norms than females, (8) certain prescribed gender roles are dysfunctional, (9) each sex experiences strain related to gender role in their occupational and familial roles, and (10) historical change causes gender role strain (i.e., as gender norms transform with time, what is needed to meet these norms changes and can cause gender role strain).   Pleck (1981) proposed three types of strain that follow his ten propositions for GRSP: discrepancy strain, dysfunctional strain, and trauma strain. Discrepancy strain occurs when one fails to demonstrate that individual’s internalized manhood ideal (Pleck, 1981). To measure discrepancy strain, two scales have been developed: Masculine Attitudes, Stress, and Confirming Questionnaire by Nabavi (2004) and Masculine Gender Role Discrepancy Scale by Reidy, Berke, Gentile, and Zeichner (2015). Pleck (1981) hypothesized that the greater one’s discrepancy strain is, the lower their self-esteem is. One study by Deutsch and Gilbert (1976) found a relationship for Pleck’s hypothesis regarding discrepancy strain, but the research is still mixed. In a sample of college men, Rummell and Levant (2014) did not find evidence for a negative relationship between masculine gender role discrepancy strain and self-esteem. In contrast, Liu, Rochlen and Mohr (2005) investigated the relationship between real and ideal 28  gender role conflict and psychological distress. They found that 80-90% of people displayed discrepancy with how they viewed their real selves versus their ideal selves.   Dysfunctional strain occurs after men exemplify the traditionally desirable masculine norms but experience the negative side effects associated with it, such as demonstrating toughness and engaging in violence (Brooks & Silversteen, 1995). Dysfunctional strain can also impact others/society (Pleck, 1981). Brooks and Silversteen (1995) described this as the “dark side of masculinity” (Brooks & Silversteen, 1995, p. 280). Extensive research has examined the problematic behaviours associated with adopting a traditional masculinity identity. Brooks and Silversteen (1995) categorize these problematic behaviors as: violence (i.e., male violence against women, rape and sexual assault, sexual harassment), sexual excess (i.e., promiscuity, pornography use, sexual addiction), socially irresponsible behaviours (i.e., alcoholism, drug abuse, risk-taking, self-abuse, absent fathering, homelessness, vagrancy, dropping out) and relationship dysfunctions (i.e., inadequate emotional partners, non-nurturing fathers, nonparticipative household partners) (Silversteen, 1995, p. 282-295). In fact, an entire theoretical perspective about dysfunctional strain was developed by O’Neil (1986) (see next section).   Trauma strain occurs when the impact of the male gender role is particularly harsh for men and others. It has been argued that being socialized with traditional masculinity ideals is inherently traumatic (Pleck, 1981). Levant (1992) proposed that an outcome of this inherently traumatic experience and traditional masculine ideals (for example restricted emotionality) is Normative Male Alexithymia. The inability to identify and describe one’s own emotions is known as alexithymia. The existence of Normative Male Alexithymia has been identified in the literature (Levant, Richmond, Majors, Inclan, Rossello, Heesacker,…Sellers, 2003) even leading to the development of a Normative Male Alexithymia Scale (Levant, 2006). Research has also 29  investigated alexithymia reduction treatments for men (Levant, Halter, Hayden, & Williams, 2009).  The empirical basis of GRSP is substantial considering its conception was only a few decades ago. Research has gone into understanding the social contexts of masculine gender role strain, such as life course variations in the socially constructed meanings of masculinity and gender role strain. Thompson and Bennett (2015) summarize the literature by saying that life course development and intersectionality impacts how much strain is experienced by men. In a quantitative study, Barrett and White (2002) found evidence for the increase of masculine gender role strain during the ages of 12-15 in boys. Using a qualitative method, Tanneubaum and Frank (2011) found that men develop less rigid masculine gender roles as they age. Brannen and Nilson (2006) and Roy (2006; 2008) describe the changes in social roles (for example, becoming a father) impacting gender role strain. Men who are part of minority groups and who are poor are more likely to experience gender role strain (Courtenay, 2000; Williams, 2008). Specifically, socially vulnerable groups of men may feel more strain because they lack power and freedom to actualize their idealized manhood (Muñoz Boudet, Petesch, Turk, & Thumala, 2012). The GRSP has been examined in college aged men with respect to dating violence (McDermott, Naylor, McKelvey & Kantra, 2017), gender role harassment (Funk & Werhun, 2011), parental relationship quality (Fischer, 2007), alcohol use (Korcuska & Thombs, 200), alexithymia (Levant, Allen, & Lien, 2014), and self-esteem (Rummell & Levant, 2014). Less research has been done with culturally diverse college aged men using GRSP, but exists (Garrison, Kim, & Liu, 2018). Additional research on college aged men and GRSP can be found as unpublished dissertations (DeFranc, 1999; Bursley, 1995; Hetzel, 1997). Despite its popularity in research (Wong, Steinfeldt, Speight, & Hickman, 2010), the GRSP has notable limitations.  30   While it is considered the most widely used contemporary approach to understanding masculinity (Wong et al., 2010), it is not without its criticisms. Whorley and Addis (2006) critiqued the sampling techniques and methods used to measure GRSP in the literature, considering it less applicable to diverse populations. Many studies used self-report measures, were correlational, and used participants who were primarily white, heterosexual and college students (Whorely & Addis, 2006). Several authors have found that most men do not endorse traditional masculine norms, questioning GRSP’s relevance in understanding masculinity (Levant, Cuthbert, Richmond, Sellers, Matveev, Matina, & Soklovsky, 2003; Levant, Hall, & Rankin, 2013; Levant & Majors, 1997; Levant, Rankin, Williams, Hasan, & Smalley, 2010; Liu, Rochlen, & Mohr, 2005). As mentioned earlier, O’Neil and colleagues (1986) developed an entire theory related to discrepancy strain and it is discussed next.  2.3.3 Gender Role Conflict Theory   O’Neil and colleagues developed the Gender Role Conflict (GRC) Theory in 1986. GRC is a “psychological state where gender roles have negative consequences or impact a person or others” (O’Neil, Wester, Heesacker, & Snowden, 2017, p. 75). These negative consequences/impacts ultimately restrict an individual’s ability to actualize their human potential and result in psychological distress (O’Neil et al., 1986). The Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) was developed in 1986 to measure GRC and, since its development, several studies have used it to examine the patterns of GRC. Four empirically derived patterns that are linked to men emerged.   The first GRC pattern is “success, power, and competition” and is described as the emphasis of using power and competitiveness to achieve success. “Restricted emotionality,” the second GRC pattern, is the reservation towards expressing emotions. The third pattern is 31  “restricted affectionate behaviour between men,” and refers to the reservation of expressing “tender feelings” with other men. The fourth pattern, “conflict between work and family relationships,” refers to the reservations of men to find balance in their relationship, eventually leading to distress (O’Neil et al., 2017). GRC can occur at cognitive, emotional, behavioural, and unconscious levels. It occurs intrapersonally, interpersonally, and during gender role transitions (O’Neil et al., 2017).  Specifically regarding gender role transitions, GRC can be personally experienced in three ways: (a) gender role de-evaluations (negative self-evaluation of self or others when conforming to, deviating from, or violating traditional masculine norms), (b) gender role restrictions (bounding oneself or others to traditional male norms), and (c) gender role violations (harm from self or towards others resulting from traditional gender role norms) (O’Neil, 2008). The Gender Role Journey is a therapeutic framework that helps people reflect on how GRC and gender role socialization impacts them (O’Neil & Egan, 1992, 1993; O’Neil, Egan, Owen & Murray, 1993). The phases of the Gender Role Journey are: (a) acceptance of traditional gender roles, (b) ambivalence, fear, anger and confusion of gender roles, and (c) personal and professional activism. Situational aspects of GRC are explored with the Gender Role Journey framework (O’Neil et al., 2017).   Worldwide, there are over 400 studies that use the GRCS to examine GRC. Empirical data have made the connection between GRC to men’s cognitive, affective and behavioural processes, including consistently showing statistically significant relationships to traditional attitudes towards women, stereotyping, anti-gay attitudes, anxiety, depression, anger, lower self-esteem, and risky and hostile behaviour (O’Neil et al., 2017). College men have been well assessed using the GRC theory. Several studies explore GRC in relation to help-seeking with 32  college aged men (Pederson & Vogel, 2007; Groeschel, Wester, & Sedivy, 2010; Steinfeldt & Steinfeldt, 2009; Shepherd & Richard, 2012; Wahto & Swift, 2016; Good & Wood, 1995). Well-being (Kaya, Iwamoto, Brady, Clinton, & Grivel, 2018), self-esteem (Shek & McEwen, 2012; Schwartz & Tylka, 2008) and psychological disorders (e.g., depression, eating disorders) (Good & Wood, 1995; Blashill & Vander Wal, 2009; Shepherd & Richard, 2012) are also popular topics examined using GRC with college aged men. While lesser in frequency, studies examining GRC with culturally diverse college aged men do exist (Gasrcía-Sánchez, Almendros, Gámez-Guadix, Martín, Aramayona, & Martínez, 2018; Shek & McEwen, 2012; Davies & Liang, 2015). While many studies exist that find evidence for the GRC theory, it has been criticized for several reasons.  GRC theory has been criticized for failing to assess GRC longitudinally (Smiler, 2004), its limited applicability to diverse men, and its “limited utility in assessing the situational dynamics of men’s gendered behaviour,” (O’Neil et al., 2017, p. 82). In addressing the criticism that the GRC theory does not address the functional aspects of traditional gender roles (i.e., how traditionally masculine behaviours allow men to successfully meet situational goals) (Addis et al., 2010), O’Neil et al. (2017) speak about masculinity as a heuristic. They posit that masculinity is a label given to an immediate and sufficient problem-solving strategy (i.e., a heuristic) (O’Neil et al., 2017). Using this understanding of masculinity, O’Neil and colleagues (2017) discuss why men engage in certain stereotypical behaviours. The review thus far has considered the well-developed modern theories of men and masculinity. The next section of the review explores the nascent theoretical approaches. 33  2.4 Part IV – Nascent Approaches to Understanding Men and Masculinities  2.4.1 Critical Discursive Analytic Approach   In 2014, Wetherell and Edley proposed a Critical Discursive Analytic Approach (CDAA) to studying men and masculinities. The authors describe a need for attention to the subtle differences between how men talk about and view masculinities as “practical accomplishments,” (Wetherell & Edley, 2014, p. 1) instead of enacting particular (gender) roles. Discursive psychology focuses on language and examines the way people talk about constructs to view how identities are produced/established (Wetherell & Edley, 2014). Traditional approaches to psychology view language as a path to understand the inner workings of the inner mind, but discursive psychology acknowledges that people can be both the products and producers of discourse (Billig, 1991).   A discursive approach to masculinities is seen as “sets of variable practices that are actively developed and negotiated in relation to other forms of identity in particular cultural contexts” (Wetherell & Edley, 2014, p. 4). By examining men’s narratives and interactions, the attention of a CDAA to masculinities focuses on the individual meaning making around masculinities. The CDAA is a framework used to examine the nuanced aspects of masculinities (Seymour-Smith, 2017; Seymour-Smith, Brown, Cosma, Shopland, Battersby, & Burton, in press; Seymour-Smith, Wetherell, & Pheoninx, 2002; Edley & Wetherell, 1997; Wetherell & Edley, 1999). Examples of the CDAA being used to understand complex constructions of masculinities include men’s involvement in a men’s self-help group (Seymour-Smith, Wetherell, & Pheoninx, 2002) and receiving digital rectal exams (Seymour-Smith et al., in press). Specific to college aged men, studies have examined the construction of masculinities in contemporary Britain (Gough, 2001) and with respect to the consumption of alcohol (Dempster, 2011).   34  2.4.2 Masculine Gender Role Stress  Masculine Gender Role Stress (MGRS) is a construct developed by Eisler and Skidmore in 1987 and focuses on the relationship between the male gender role, stress and coping (Isacco & Wade, 2017). MGRS is defined as the “cognitive appraisal of specific situations as stressful for men,” (Eisler & Skidmore, 1987, p. 135). They argue that men experience stress resulting from failing to exemplify traditional (and rigid) gender roles. Adherence to traditional gender roles guard against being socially ostracized (Pleck, 1987) and provide social rewards for being masculine (Isaco & Wade, 2017). Eisler and Skidmore (1987) predict that men with higher levels of MGRS are at increased risk of negative physical and psychological outcomes (Issaco & Wade, 2017). MGRS is similar to previously mentioned theories (e.g., GRSP and GRC), however its major contribution to the field has been the construction of a measurement tool.   Eisler and Skidmore (1987) developed the MGRS Scale in 1987 to measure MGRS. The five empirically derived factors for the MGRS Scale include physical inadequacy, emotional inexpressiveness, subordination to women, intellectual inferiority, and fear of performance failure (Eisler & Skidmore, 1987). Support for construct validity is mixed (Issaco & Wade, 2017). The MGRS Scale has been used to examine the ways men cope with meeting (or not meeting) masculine gender roles.   Much of the research on MGRS and the MGRS Scale has been conducted with college aged (i.e., undergraduate) men and women. The initial items and initial validation of the MGRS Scale used undergraduate participants (Eisler, 1995; Eisler & Skidmore, 1987; Eisler, Skidmore, & Ward, 1988). Eisler, Franchina, Moore, Honeycutt, and Rhatigan (2000) reported that undergraduate men who had higher scores on the MGRS Scale had higher levels of verbal and physical aggression, irritation, anger and jealousy. In undergraduate samples, higher levels of 35  anxiety, anger, poorer health behaviours and less emotional expression were observed in individuals with higher scores on the MGRS Scale (Eisler, Skidmore, & Ward, 1988; Robertson, Lin, Woodford, Danos, & Hurst, 2001). 2.4.3 Male Reference Group Identity Dependence  Wade (1998) created the Male Reference Group Identity Dependence (MRGID) Theory to explain why men differ in their masculinity ideologies. It combines Erikson’s (1969) Ego Identity Development Theory and Sherif’s (1962) Reference Group Theory to identify “Male Identity Statuses” (Wade 1998). These statuses illustrate how ego identity and male reference groups work together to form gender role self-concepts in men (Wade, 1998). Ego identity status impacts your MRGID, which in turn, influences your gender role self-concept. Reference group identity dependence is the degree of dependence on a reference group for the development of men’s gender role self-concepts (Wade, 1998). The three statuses are: (a) reference group non-dependant, (b) reference group dependant, and (c) no reference group (Wade, 1998).    Men with a MRGID status as defined as “reference group non-dependent,” experience psychological relatedness to all males, have an integrated ego identity status and an internally defined and integrated gender role self-concept (i.e., having flexible, autonomous, and pluralistic gender-related attitudes and behaviours). Men with a MRGID status as defined as “reference group dependent” experience psychological relatedness to particular males, have a conformist ego identity and an externally defined and confirming gender role self-concept (i.e., adherence to stereotyped gender related attitudes and behaviours). Men with a MRGID status as defined as “no reference group” experience a lack of psychological relation to males and have an 36  undefined/fragmented gender role self-concept (i.e., having confusing, anxious, lonely and insecure gender role experiences) (Wade, 1998).   Wade and Geslo (1998) developed the Reference Group Identity Dependence Scale (RGIDS) to measure psychological relatedness. Mixed psychometric evidence exists regarding the RGIDS (Wade & Geslo, 1998). In support of the theory, the “no reference group” status was related to “identity diffusion” and poor psychological outcomes. The “reference group dependence” status was related to gender role conflict and “identity foreclosure.” Finally, the “reference non-dependence” status was related to “identity achievement” and no gender role conflict. Other studies have found mixed support for the RGIDS (Wade & Britton-Powell, 2000; Moradi, Velez, & Parent, 2013; Wade & Coughlin, 2012). In an undergraduate sample of men (Wade, 2001), a contrary finding was identity achievement’s association with negative attitudes toward gender equality. While the RGIDS is an insightful contribution to the field dedicated to understanding masculinity, it is limited due to its mixed empirical support.    2.4.4 Conformity to Masculine Norms  Mahalik’s (2000) Conformity to Masculine Norms is a theoretical model to understand the ways men adopt gender norms. This approach focuses on determining to what degree men conform to masculinity norms and what influences that degree. Meeting society’s expectations of what it means to be masculine is defined as conforming to masculine norms (Isacco & Wade, 2017). Mahalik (2000) hypothesized that: (a) society shapes gender roles, (b) gender roles are communicated through descriptive norms, injunctive norms and cohesive norms, (c) an individual’s understanding of gender role norms is impacted by group factors (i.e., socioeconomic status, race, culture, religion) and individual factors (i.e., age, personality, 37  identity), and (d) these individual and group factors are what determine a person’s conformity to masculine norms (Issaco & Wade, 2017). Conforming and not conforming to dominant masculine norms have costs and benefits.   To measure the degree that a man conforms to dominant masculine norms, Mahalik et al. (2003) created the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI). The CMNI has been used with a diverse sample of men including college students (Steinfeldt, Gilchrest, Halterman, Gomory & Steinfeldt, 2011). Higher conformity to masculine norms has been associated with negative attitudes towards help seeking (Wimer & Levant, 2011; Hammer, Vogel & Heimerdinger-Edwards, 2010), a desire to have more muscle, (Griffiths, Murray & Touyz, 2015) and psychological distress (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005; Alfred, Hammer & Good, 2014; Rice, Fallon & Bambling, 2011). The Conformity to Masculine Norms model has been criticized for only explaining masculine norms that are dominant in an American society (Issaco & Wade, 2017). Providing a more nuanced analysis of the costs and benefits of conforming and not conforming is suggested to advance the theory (Issaco & Wade, 2017).  2.4.5 Precarious Manhood  Vandello and colleagues (Vadello & Bosson, 2013; Vandello, Bosson, Cohen, Burnaford & Weaver, 2008) developed the theory known as Precarious Manhood (PM). The theory acknowledges psychoanalytic, evolutionary and anthropologic views of gender, as well as Gender Role Stress Theory, Gender Role Strain Paradigm and Gender Role Conflict Theory (Vandello & Bosson, 2013; Issaco & Wade, 2017). The theory is built on three tenets: (a) manhood is a precarious and an elusive social status that must be achieved or earned, (b) the status of manhood is tenuous and impermanent, and (c) manhood is confirmed by others and therefore requires public displays to achieve status. In contrast, womanhood is viewed as a status 38  that is confirmed through biological changes and therefore remains stable after it is attained (Vandello & Bosson, 2013, Issaco & Wade, 2017).   The theory was developed through empirical research. Using an experimental design, male and female participants attributed manhood more to social factors over physical factors (Vandello et al. 2008), supportive of the first tenet of the theory. To examine the second tenet, Vandello et al. (2008) asked participants to describe “lost manhood” and “lost womanhood.” “Lost manhood” was attributed to more social than physical causes. Weaver, Vandello, Bosson, & Burnaford (2010) found evidence for the third tenet of PM through participant’s responses to describing a “real man” and “real woman.” More action words were used to describe a “real man.” The evidence base for PM is strengthened in using experimental design, however its reliance on primarily white, middle-class undergraduate students in the United States is problematic for applicability to diverse populations.   2.4.6 Masculinity Contingency   Burkley, Wong and Bell (2016) developed the concept of Masculinity Contingency (MC) to explain why some men assign higher importance to perceiving oneself as masculine, and some men assign lower importance. MC is defined as the “degree to which a man’s self-worth is derived from his sense of masculinity” (Issaco &Wade, 2017, p. 160). A man’s sense of self will be confirmed if the feedback he receives about himself is congruent with his masculine self-concept (Issaco & Wade, 2017). Burkley et al. (2016) defined two types of MC: contingency threat and contingency boost. Contingency threat pertains to the degree a man’s self-worth is threatened by a lack of his masculinity. Contingency boost pertains to the degree a man’s self-worth is boosted by confirmation of his masculinity (Burkley et al. 2016; Issaco & Wade, 2017). Burkley et al. (2016) assert that defending oneself from threats to masculinity would cause more 39  of an impact than attempts to confirm masculinity and therefore negative outcomes are more likely associated with contingency threat than contingency boost.   The empirically validated Masculinity Contingency Scale was developed using undergraduate men and measures to what degree a man’s self-worth would be threatened by a lack of masculinity and boosted by confirmation of masculinity (Burkley et al. 2016). While MC has contributed to the understanding of men, more exploration about why men’s sense of masculinity would underlie their sense of worth is needed (Issaco & Wade, 2017).  2.4.7 Positive Psychology – Positive Masculinity   To compliment GRSP, Kiselica, Englar-Carlson and colleagues developed the Positive Psychology – Positive Masculinity (PPPM) theoretical perspective by focusing on the strengths of masculinity, as the GRSP has been associated with explaining the problems men face as a result of gender role socialization. Researchers hoped that identifying these strengths would assist clinicians in fostering positive emotions in male clients (Kiselica, Benton-Wright, Englar-Carlon, 2016). PPPM is based on (a) positive psychology, (b) positive masculinity and (c) research on adolescent and young fathers (Issaco & Wade, 2017). The PPPM argues that the contemporary research on men and masculinity was “too focused on a deficit model of male development and traditional male socialization,” (Issaco & Wade, 2017, p. 158). By focusing on the destructive aspects of masculinity (i.e., conflict and stress), research on the positive aspects of manhood were less understood.   Positive Masculinity is defined as “prosocial attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours of boys and men that produce positive consequences for self and others” (Kiselica et al, 2016, p. 126). Kiselica et al. (2016) identifies eleven characteristics of positive masculinity. These characteristics include: (a) male relational styles (e.g., fostering relationships with other men 40  through shared activities), (b) male ways of caring (e.g., to care and provide for friends and family), (c) generative fatherhood (e.g., readily responding to their children’s developmental needs to foster future generational success), (d) male self-reliance (e.g., using one’s own resources to solve problems), (e) worker-provider tradition (e.g., earning an income through employment), (f) men’s respect for women (e.g., teaching their children to respect their mothers), (g) male courage, daring, and risk taking (e.g., facing hazards in order to protect others), (h) group orientation of boys and men (e.g., preferring to work in groups to achieve a common goal), (i) male forms of service (e.g., community service), (j) men’s use of humour (e.g., using humour to foster relationships and cope), and (k) male heroism (e.g., demonstrating exceptional nobility). When research began to investigate positive psychology constructs within traditional masculinity, Hammer and Good (2010) found that some aspects of traditional masculinity (i.e., risk-taking, status-orientated) were positively associated with courage and resilience. In a Canadian sample, researchers found that college age men endorsed positive-related masculine values including the care and concern for others (Oliffe, Rice, Kelly, Ogrodniczuk, Broom, Robertson & Black, 2018). In applying the model to clinical interventions, Kiselica et al. (2016) assert that incorporating a strengths-based approach to masculinity can have positive benefits, such as favourable attitudes towards treatment, and increased father involvement. Interventions are geared towards fostering the eleven characteristics of positive masculinity. As a relatively new approach to understanding men and boys many of its tenets lack empirical validation (Levant, 2008). McDermott (2018) did a research study in search of positive masculine role norms using a college age population and found 79 potentially positive masculinity attributes (e.g., honest, loyal, having wisdom). In a cross-cultural examination of positive masculinity, Estrada and Archinega (2015) found evidence for their hypothesis that a prosocial form of 41  masculinity in the Mexican culture called caballerismo, predicted subjective well-being in college aged men. Support for using the PPPM clinically was found through a study published by Cole, Petronzi, Singley, and Baglieri (2018) that examined men’s perceptions and preferences for types of psychotherapy. A survey of 315 adult men revealed that men preferred PPPM informed therapy to cognitive behavioural therapy. More connection to research, theory and practice is needed to advance PPPM theory further (Issaco & Wade, 2017).  2.5 Part V – Possible Masculinities and the Current Study  2.5.1 Possible Masculinities  Davies, Shen-Miller and Issaco (2010) describe the notion of possible masculinity (later changed to possible masculinities) and its relationship to providing effective therapeutic interventions. Given college men’s poor health and social outcomes (Courtenay, 2000; Singh, Kochanek & MacDorman, 1994; Statistics Canada, 2005; Viallancourt, 2010) and their reluctance to seeking help for their concerns (Addis & Mahalik, 2003), an approach to helping men using therapy that is congruent with men’s cultural norms has been recommended (Liu & Rochlen, 2005). Davies et al. (2010) filled this gap by introducing possible masculinities as an effective approach to working with college aged men. Davies et al. (2010) developed this concept through their work at a men’s centre at the University of Oregon. They title their approach with college men as the Men’s Center Approach (MCA) (Davies et al., 2010).   Davies et al. (2010) describe the mission of the MCA is “to promote possible masculinity to help lead healthy lives. Possible masculinities are an aspirational and future oriented goal for men’s identity and behaviours based on (a) what men want to be in the future, (b) what men require to meet their developmental needs, and (c) what we, as a community, need from men to foster community safety and health,” (Davies et al. 2010, p. 348).  42   In their work with men, the developers of the construct of possible masculinities noticed that the interventions in existence were primarily based on deficit explanations of masculinity (i.e., GRSP, GRC) and often unsuccessful (Davies et al. 2010; Kiselica et al, 2016). What these interventions were lacking in was teaching men healthy behaviours, attitudes and goals. Davies et al. (2010) considered emphasizing a future orientation in interventions with men to address another observation they noticed in the field: “a lack of purpose in the lives of men who were experiencing difficulties” (Davies et al. 2010, p. 348). Davies et al. (2010) noticed that a focus in future goals led men to more easily identify and address barriers, engaging in problem solving and assuming their responsibility within the community. The concept of possible masculinities further emphasised men’s relationship with the community: how they impact the community and what they need from the community for healthy development (Davies et al. 2010).   The theoretical underpinning of possible masculinities comes from PPPM (Kiselica et al., 2016), Person Centered Therapy (i.e., Rogerian) and Possible Selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986). The influence of PPPM is evident in possible masculinities’ emphasis on the positive aspects of traditional masculine norms. Davies et al. (2010) describe that even though men’s real selves are composed of negative social behaviours, their ideal selves are positive. In differentiating itself from the Rogerian view, Davies et al. (2010) state “possible masculinity looks at the incongruence between real self versus ideal future self” (Davies et al., 2010, p. 349). In looking at ideal future self (as opposed to the Rogerian ideal self), the approach “consider[s] men [as] capable of making lasting change towards congruence between their real and ideal future selves, including appropriate expression of emotion, positive health behaviors, power sharing in relationships, and flexibility in gender roles” (Davies et al. 2010, p.349). Possible masculinities aim to redefine masculine ideals so that these ideals promote healthy men and society at large. 43  The developers of this concept also express the strong impact of feminist psychology (i.e., how power and hierarchical relationships impact the experience of men) (Brown, 2004) in developing interventions that foster possible masculinities.   The evolving and dynamic goals for working with men from this approach is to build the following into men’s identities and behaviours: (a) respect of diversity, (b) awareness of power and privilege inherent in being male, (c) engagement in nonviolent conflict resolution, (d) awareness of gendered socialization process and men’s interdependency needs, (e) openness to seeking help, (f) holding a true sense of competence, (g) ability to express a wide range of feelings, (h) ability to foster healthy, equal intimate relationships, (i) ability and persistence to achieving academic and career success, (j) ability to find and create meaning in one’s life, and (k) excitement about the positive qualities that men possess and contributions they can make to society (Davies et al., 2010).  Seven key components of interventions that foster possible masculinities (i.e., the MCA), were adopted based on the authors’ clinical experiences with working with college aged men and current literature on men and masculinities. Key component one (acceptance, non-judgement, unconditional positive regard) cites literature stating unconditional positive regard creates a non-threatening environment where men can begin making self-directed change (Weaver, 2008). Shame associated with asking for help can be combated using acceptance and non-judgement (Bergman, 1995). Key component two (respect for diversity) emphasizes the importance of considering intersectionalities, especially as college aged individuals are engaged in identity development across dimensions (Chickering & Reisesr, 1993; Davies et al., 2010). Key component three (working from the inside out) highlight the importance of clinicians’ self-awareness about their own personal gender socialization in working with men for its ability to 44  develop empathy for their clients. Key component four (power sharing) emphasize equalizing and sharing power. Key component five (strategic use of the planning process) promotes community engagement to foster collaborative decision making. Key component six (therapeutic environments in nontherapeutic settings) makes use of non-traditional therapy settings to address resistance to help seeking behaviour. Lastly, key component seven (commitment to social justice and activism) emphasizes engaging in social activism to promote possible masculinities, as these types of activities are related to development, a sense of direction and feelings of belonging (McIntosh, Metz, & Youniss, 2015). Authors provide examples of interventions that use a MCA-informed approach and exemplify the seven key components: “Madskills,” “Fraternity Leadership Class” and “Be That Guy” (Davies et al., 2010; Shen-Miller et al. 2013). They are discussed here for exemplification purposes. “Madskills” addresses conduct violators on campus by challenging men to reflect on how their masculinity affects their conduct, what kind of men they want to be in the future, and when to seek help. The “Fraternity Leadership Class” promotes positive leadership skills to reduce high risk behaviour and encourage help seeking by reflecting on what kinds of leaders they want to be in the future (Davies et al., 2010). Finally, the “Be That Guy” campaign asked men to reflect on their ideal selves and future goals to address the issues of sexual assault on campus (Shen-Miller et al., 2013).  The notion of possible masculinities offers a unique perspective to understanding the psychology of men. In 2013, the authors added to the literature on possible masculinities by connecting it to Bronfrenbrenner’s Ecological Model (Shen-Miller et al., 2013; Bronfrenbrenner, 1979) to direct culturally sensitive intervention efforts for college men.  45  Using the future oriented approach of possible masculinities, we gain a greater and fuller theoretical understanding of men and how they conceptualize themselves in the future, a much-needed area of research. Researchers have identified the need for more theoretical exploration of the concept of masculinities (Issaco, 2015), and the notion of possible masculinities is adding to that literature base. Given the negative health and social consequences of college aged men (Davies et al., 2000) and the promising preliminary observations of using a positive stance of thinking about men, building on the concept of possible masculinities will aid in the overall understanding of how men understand themselves and how we understand men, especially for college aged men.  The support for possible masculinities is primarily limited to the developers’ clinical experiences and current scholarly writing. At the time of developing the present study, only two articles (Davies et al., 2010; Shen-Miller et al., 2013) had been published addressing the concept of possible masculinities. Both were only conceptual/theoretical articles and at that time, no empirical research studies appeared to have existed. Shen-Miller et al. (2013) briefly mentioned a possible masculinities scale being in development but information about this scale is yet to be published. Following the analysis of the data in the current study, it came to the author’s attention that a brand-new study had just been published on possible masculinities by Molenaar and Liang (2020) exploring how men understand various personal manhoods if they perceive barriers between these manhoods and their present selves. They found that men may understand their masculinities in unique ways based on how masculinity is framed. Men in the study differed in identifying their possible masculinities and perceived barriers based on whether they were asked to comment on: “ideally what kind of man would you like to become?” versus “what kind of man should you be?” (Molenaar & Liang, 2020, p. 321). As a brief qualitative exploration, the 46  authors reported more research is needed to gain clarity on their findings. While Molenaar and Liang’s (2020) study serves as the first known empirical study examining possible masculinities, no studies exist that explore possible masculinities with the intent to advance its theoretical understanding. Therefore, our understanding of possible masculinities is still only emerging and empirical research on this construct is seriously lacking. With its promise in improving programming efforts with college aged men (Davies et al., 2010; Shen-Miller et al., 2013) more empirical research exploring possible masculinities is warranted, especially empirical examination furthering the theoretical basis of possible masculinities.  2.5.2 The Current Study  At its broadest level, the current study addressed the need for a fuller exploration of men and masculinities, especially theoretically, especially through a positive psychology non-deficit lens, and especially related to alternative conceptualizations of masculinities that consider masculinity as not uniform (Issaco, 2015). Research has shown the negative social and health consequences men experience, including and perhaps especially college aged men’s experience, result from adhering to, or attempting to adhere to, traditional masculine norms. The concept of possible masculinities has provided a unique perspective on how all men, including college aged men, understand themselves in the future and has inspired successful clinical interventions. Possible masculinities is a construct that was developed from observations by clinicians and relevant indirect research, but possible masculinities needed to be more fully explored systematically and qualitatively in order to advance the theoretical understanding of the construct. At the time of developing the present study, no empirical research on this construct had been conducted. Currently (i.e., following analysis of data in the present study), only one study exists that examined possible masculinities empirically, but no empirical studies exist with 47  the intent of enhancing our theoretical understanding of possible masculinities. Issaco (2015) suggested future research about men and masculinities should employ qualitative methodology, such as grounded theory, to build on theoretical explanations or create new ones. Given men’s – in particular college aged men’s, negative health consequences, the need for theoretical exploration of masculinities, and the limited research on possible masculinities, the aim of the present study was to fully explore the existing yet elusive concept of possible masculinities by generating a theory grounded in data that sought to explain how college aged men envision their possible masculinities (i.e., what men want to be in the future.) In other words, the aim was to explore the concept of possible masculinities using a qualitative methodology that captured dimensions of the concept using data and is therefore empirical in nature. This study employed Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) approach to grounded theory, which has its theoretical roots in symbolic interactionism and pragmatism, because of its ability to examine unique gendered experiences to develop a model or theory that aids in the betterment of real-life issues (e.g., improving therapeutic interventions). Methods and methodology are considered next.  48  Chapter 3: Methodology 3.1 An Introduction to the Methodology Section  The present researcher’s plan for her thesis was to occur in two phases. In Phase I, transcripts and audio recordings of eight previously conducted focus groups (one focus group consisted of one person) were analysed. Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) approach to Grounded Theory (GT) was used to systematically code and analyze transcript data, eventually formulating a model, grounded in research. The resulting model is titled Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model (EPMM) and illustrates the contextual factors contributing to how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. Additionally, the EPMM describes the components of the construct “possible masculinities.” The second of the two phases was optional given the outcome of the first phase. In Phase II, an additional estimated one or two focus groups were to be conducted using theoretical sampling (a data collection strategy to collect subsequent data) to strengthen the resulting grounded theory if there was evidence that data saturation was not reached or that the resulting model was not fully elaborated. In the end, there was no need to conduct Phase II, as theoretical saturation occurred during Phase I and the present researcher believed her model was fully elaborated upon. Nevertheless, Phase II is described in this chapter for the reader’s information.   This chapter begins with an overview of the history and development of GT methodology, including a discussion of its different iterations. Following this, reflexivity and theoretical sensitivity are addressed. The chapter then moves into describing data collection, participant information, and data analysis. Several sections are dedicated to describing and demonstrating the GT analysis procedures followed in the present study. Next, ethical issues are addressed. Finally, the conditions and criteria for fostering rigor and credibility are discussed.  49  3.2 Grounded Theory and Epistemology Grounded Theory (GT), developed by sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss in 1967, is a research methodology that aims to generate novel theory as it emerges from data that is gathered and analyzed (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). It was created in response to the popular research conventions of the 1960s. Glaser and Strauss (1967) criticized these conventions of deducing theories that were not first substantiated with empirical evidence. Glaser and Strauss also wanted to move away from the idea that a single theory can be used to explain a phenomenon (Glaser & Struss, 1967; Howard-Payne, 2015). They believed that using a logico-deductive approach to theory generation would result in biases and has the potential to only verify the validity of the existing theory, resulting in circular reasoning (Locke, 1996, Howard-Payne, 2015). To prevent this bias, Glaser and Strauss (1967) created a systematic approach to analysing data that abandons the use of a priori hypotheses. Instead, they followed the lead of the data to create a model/theory to explain their results. Howard-Payne (2015) describe GT’s two primary functions: (a) to protect against circular reasoning that creates “theoretical stagnation and immobility” (p. 52) by generating novel theories, and (b) using field data as sources of theory development to make sure that the theory is generated using sound scientific data. GT provides a systematic framework to work through the gathering, coding and analyzing of data to create a mid-range theory (Mathison, 2016). A mid-range theory is one that describes a phenomenon in relation to a particular context. For example, if a theory was created based on data collected with college aged men living in the pacific northwest between 2013 and 2014, the results can only be applied to other college aged men living in the pacific northwest during that time period. In this way, it can be useful in certain contexts, but cannot be generalized to all situations (Mathison, 2016). 50  Over the years, the approach to GT has diversified. Three major approaches to GT have been proposed: (a) Glasserian approach (b) Straussian approach, and (c) Charmaz’s social constructivist approach. Each approach to GT has developed a different set of coding paradigms. Each version also can be seen to hold different ontologies and epistemologies. The original construction of GT, the Glasserian approach, was created by Glaser and Strauss in 1967, is described as post-positivist3, and focuses on the dictum “all is data.” “All is data” refers to the idea that all information gathered (literature review, interviews, focus groups, etc.) is data. The Straussian approach to GT, developed in 1990 by Corbin and Strauss, is described as pragmatic and uses symbolic interactionism to develop a GT. The Straussian approach to interacting with data, compared to the Glasserian approach, is more structured and systematic. Finally, the social constructivist approach to GT, created by Charmaz in 2000, is characterized by a “distinctly constructivist philosophy4” (Kenny & Fourie, 2015, p. 1278) and “resist[s] a concrete, rule-bound, prescriptive approaching to coding” (Kenny & Fourie, 2015, p. 1278), resulting “with the researcher’s interpretative understanding (rather than explanation) of the studied social processes which is presented in the form of a story” (Kenny & Fourie, 2015, p. 1279).  3 Post-positivism emerged in the 19th-century countering “the traditional notion of the absolute truth of knowledge,” (Creswell, 2014, p. 36). Post-positivism contends that we cannot be sure about our claims of knowledge as observation is fallible and has error in it (i.e., observations are subject to the observer’s biases) (Phillips & Burbules, 2000). This view emphasizes the use of multiple measures and observations (i.e., triangulation) to develop relevant and true statements (Phillips & Burbules, 2000). The accepted approach to research by post-positivists is the scientific method and uses Karl Popper’s concept of falsification: to be scientific, something must be able to be proven false (Creswell, 2014). Post-positivism is also deterministic (i.e., causes determine effects) and reductionistic (i.e., reducing ideas into a smaller, simpler set) (Creswell, 2014).  4 A constructivist philosophy is based on a relativist ontology, that assumes the existence of multiple social realities (Charmaz, 2000; Kenny & Fourie, 2015). This position “endorses the researcher and participant’s co-construction of knowledge and mutual interpretation of meaning, with the objective of fashioning an interpretative depiction of participants’ experiences” (Kenny & Fourie, 2015, p. 1283). See Charmaz (2000) for a more detailed discussion of a constructivist philosophy and its role in a constructivist approach to GT (Charmaz, 2000).  51  Corbin and Strauss’s (1990) iteration of GT (i.e., the Straussian approach) was chosen primarily for use in this study and is the theory referred to for the remainder of the paper. The Straussian approach was chosen for its epistemological root in pragmatism. Its focus on serving a real-life purpose (i.e., being pragmatic) is in line with the second purpose of the study: to aid in counselling intervention efforts with men. Aiding intervention efforts for men is needed given the many poorer life outcomes men experience in comparison to women (e.g., shorter life spans, higher risk of cancer and heart disease) and their persistence reluctance for seeking help (Addis & Mahalik, 2003).  Strauss’ approach is described as having a “flavor of post-positivism [that] is very specific [to] the philosophy of symbolic interactionism and pragmatism” (Kenny & Fourie, 2015, p. 1282). In other words, it is the philosophy that human knowledge can never be perfectly known (Phillips & Burbules, 2000), where knowledge and truth exist in the interactions between people, collectively creating meanings to a phenomenon (i.e., multiple truths exist) (Dennis, 2011).  Herbert Blumer, one of the founders of symbolic interactionism, outlined the principles of symbolic interactionism that underlies the Straussian approach. First, “human beings act towards things on the basis of the meanings that the things have for them” (Blumer, 1986, p. 2). For example, if someone has more positive or rewarding meanings associated with something (e.g., soothing sounds), they are more likely to be drawn towards it. Secondly, things do not carry an intrinsic meaning, they are given meaning through socially interacting with them (Blumber, 1986). For example, a gesture, like a handshake, does not have a meaning for an individual who has never encountered (e.g., seen, participated in) a handshake. Once they are able to encounter a handshake, they create meaning and significance (e.g., handshake as a 52  greeting) for it in their minds. Finally, these ascribed meanings are always changing during social and internal interactions (Blumber, 1986, Corbin & Strauss, 2008). As people engage with meanings within themselves and with others, these meanings can change based on new information, or viewing information differently. For example, the Swastika is an ancient symbol that, for Hindus, means “auspicious.” However, after the Nazi regime used the symbol as their official symbol, it took on a new meaning, bringing up thoughts and feelings associated with the atrocities committed during the Holocaust.     Corbin and Strauss (2008) cite the influence of pragmatism in their approach to GT from writings published by both John Dewey and George Mead. They endorse the idea that “knowledge is created through action and interaction,” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Dewey, 1929). Using a pragmatic lens, the value of knowledge is judged on its ability to serve human purposes (Moon & Blackman, 2014). Knowledge comes from acting and interacting, which is usually prompted by a problematic situation. Knowledge then can be seen as useful for practice or practical concerns (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). For example, the intent of this GT was not only to more fully understand the concept of possible masculinities in college aged men, but also to aid in practical intervention efforts for their mental health. In this study, pragmatism appears in two forms (Mounce, 1996): (a) through the purpose of the study (creating knowledge that will service a real-life problem), and (b) through the methodology (by examining college aged men’s interactions by reviewing their discussions in a focus group setting).  3.3 Reflexivity and Theoretical Sensitivity  Denzin and Lincoln (1998) write about the importance of credibility to increase the trustworthiness of qualitative research such as GT. Reflexivity is a method that aims to acknowledge the researcher’s subjectivity in the research process and it requires an ongoing 53  commitment take actions that promote a deep self-reflection in regards to data collection and analysis. By acknowledging these assumptions and precognitions, a researcher is better able to manage her actions and thought processes when researching (Smith, 2006). Even if a researcher is unable to fully manage her actions, the audience of the research has a better idea of how the researcher likely came to her conclusions, thus increasing the transparency of the research. By undertaking GT qualitative research, it was important for the present researcher to acknowledge her personal values and worldviews that may shape research on men and masculinities (i.e., how the resulting data was analyzed). The present researcher grew up in a home that endorsed traditional family values and gender roles. That, along with being a straight, cis-gendered woman, the researcher’s conceptualizations of gender could have been significantly impacted. At times in the researcher’s life, she believed that her personal freedom had been restricted by men because she is a woman. As a woman who has been adversely impacted by the negative effects of traditional masculinity, the researcher was cognizant of these impacts when engaging with the data so as to not over-colour it. For example, the researcher tried not to jump to negative reasons behind a man’s response to a focus group question given her own adverse experiences. However, because the researcher was aware that the reasons behind a certain analysis may be based on a past negative event with a man, she was better able to evaluate if the analysis was biased or not, as well as be open minded towards other reasons to explain the data. Further, being a woman, the researcher did not have personal experience with what it means to or feels like being a man and this could have impacted her ability to pick up on some nuanced and implicit themes within the data. By not being a man, the researcher did have a benefit of not being bound to the traditional narratives men tell themselves, giving her the ability to challenge those narratives in how she made sense of the data. For example, she was perhaps at a better 54  position to see where men are privileged, whereas it may have been harder for a man who is privileged to acknowledge other viewpoints.  The researcher could have been coloured by her worldviews. She identified as mainly post-positivist, but her views have become expanded by completing a graduate degree in a field that prizes social constructionism. This may have impacted her tendency to go back towards viewing data using solely a post-positivist worldview and potentially have been a barrier to acknowledging and identifying the multiple truths that exist in the data. Being a young adult currently in university may have helped in understanding the perspectives of the participants, who were also university students (i.e., college aged). For example, as a young adult who is currently in the midst of identity development, the researcher could more easily access the empathy to acknowledge how confusing, challenging, and in flux that development can be in this developmental period. Politically, the researcher identifies as liberal, possibly impacting her ability to pick up on and appreciate conservative views.   The present researcher acknowledges her privilege in certain areas: living in an urban community, attending university, and being a straight, cis-gendered woman. However, in other ways, she may be unprivileged: being an ethnic minority and growing up in a non-Christian religion (which is the majority local religion). This lack of privilege in certain areas may have benefits as a qualitative researcher. Privilege includes taking certain viewpoints for granted, and as someone who did not have privilege in some areas, she was less likely to take certain viewpoints for granted and instead account for them in the analysis of the data. For example, the researcher was more likely to acknowledge the certain experiences visible minority individuals go through and include them in the analyses, leading to a more complete GT. Finally, the researcher was aware of the power dynamics that may have existed in this study if Phase II was 55  conducted. She planned to ponder questions such as “how will my position as a researcher impact my research?” “How will my participants react to a female researcher discussing men’s issues?” These are two example questions she would have asked herself throughout the research process. In acknowledging these values, biases, and precognitions, the researcher believes she was better able to do research that fully captures the experience of the participants and provides more effective and impartial analysis of the data collected. Additional strategies to be used to maintain credibility of the research are discussed in the section: Conditions for Criteria for Rigor and Credibility.  3.4 An Introduction to the Data The data in Phase I was collected as part of a previous program development project about men and masculinities. The counselling centre at Western Washington University (WWU) aimed to improve their programming for men on campus, as did the larger student services sector at the same university. The present researcher’s supervisor consulted the centre and lent his research expertise to their primary aim of program development and evaluation. The university counselling centre used the resulting data to inform their programming but did not otherwise analyze it according to any research paradigm. The researcher had access to the original audio recordings of the focus groups, as well as de-identified transcripts. If Phase II was conducted (i.e., if more theoretical sampling was warranted to collect further focus group data to build the resulting grounded model), the researcher would have used all the same procedures, except location of recruitment, which would have been more local (WWU is located two hours away). Theoretical sampling is the practice of collecting specific additional data to add in perspectives that were found to be useful in earlier analysis of the data but were not captured in the previous round of data collection. More specifically, theoretical sampling is a method of data 56  collection that occurs after rounds of data analysis when the researcher believes that knowledge or certain perspectives are missing from the current data set. During the process of data coding, gaps may become evident, allowing the researcher to collect additional data and continue data analysis if needed. As new concepts emerge, more data can be collected to fully examine the developing concepts. Theoretical sampling occurs until data saturation (i.e., no new data/knowledge/perspectives emerge for additional data) (See section 1.6.2.1 Theoretical Sampling for an in-depth discussion on theoretical sampling). The location of recruitment for theoretical sampling, if it was needed, was to be the University of British Columbia (UBC).  3.5 Criteria for the Selection of Participants  Participants included in the study were all male-identified students from a pacific northwestern university setting. Participants needed to be 18 or older to participate in the study. All data for Phase I was previously collected from WWU. The same participant inclusion criteria would have been be used for Phase II if it were required.  3.5.1 Phase I 3.5.1.1 Procedure for Participant Recruitment. Participants were recruited using two major strategies: flyers and WWU’s SONA website. Flyers were posted primarily at the WWU Counselling Centre, psychology department, Veteran’s Centre and the university’s Men Against Violence organization. Various professors of psychology courses were further asked by email to distribute the flyer to their students. In addition, the flyer was also posted on the men’s resiliency webpage at http://www.wwu.edu/mensresiliency/focusgroups. Finally, flyers were physically handed out at the university’s main thoroughfare – an outdoor, high foot traffic area. Please see Appendix B.2 for a copy of the flyer. The second strategy utilized for recruitment was WWU’s 57  SONA website. This website manages research studies that allow participation for research credit (i.e., some courses offer extra credit by participating in research studies.)  As compensation, all participants were offered two research credits and entered in a draw to win an iTunes gift card however earning research credits was only relevant for those taking specific psychology courses for which participating in research was a course requirement. All participants were further offered refreshments during the study as an extra incentive. If additional recruitment was necessary, similar strategies would have been used at the University of British Columbia (UBC).  3.5.1.2 Participants. A total of 49 people participated in the study. These 49 individuals were interviewed in 1 of 8 focus groups. Each focus group had a range of 1-8 participants5. Participants were between the ages of 18-23 (M = 19.89 years, SD = 1.39 years), self-identified as male, and attended WWU. Of the 49 participants, 14 were freshmen (28.6%), 13 were sophomores (26.5%), 12 were juniors (24.5%), and six were seniors (12.2%). Regarding sexual orientation, the sample included 28 participants who identified as heterosexual (57.1%), three as homosexual (6.1%), one as bisexual (2.0%), and two identified as “other” (4.1%). The remaining 11 (22.4%) only indicated “male” when asked to record their sexual orientation. Regarding race/ethnicity, 37 participants self-identified as Caucasian (75.5%), two identified as Egyptian (4.1%), one identified as Asian American (2.0%), one identified as African American (2.0%),  5 There was one focus group consisting of one man and can therefore be better characterized as an interview. However, it is noted that multiple participants were scheduled to attend that particular focus group but only one participant ended up attending, and thus data was collected with this one participant.  58  and four identified as mixed ethnicity (8.2%).6 Please refer to Table 1 for a summary of the demographic characteristics of the participants sample from WWU. The WWU website lists its student demographics for 2019. 69.7% of students are described as White, 10.7% as Asian, 10% as Hispanic, 2.7% as Black/African American, 1.9% as American Indian/Alaska Native, 0.4% as Native Hawaiian/Pacific Island, and 4.6% as other (WWU, 2019). Based on these demographics, the sample collected from WWU was reasonably representative.                6 The reader will notice that for Year in School, information was missing and not available for 8.2% of participants. For Race/Ethnicity, information was missing and not available for 8.2% of participant. For Sexual Orientation, information was missing and not available for 8.3% of participants. The author received these summarized demographics (i.e., in percentages) in place of the raw demographics data and thus was unable to locate the missing data.  59  Table 1  Demographics of Participant Sample, Western Washington University Note: Regarding Sexual Orientation, 11 individuals (22.4%) only indicated “male” when asked  to record their sexual orientation. Regarding Year in School, information was missing and not available for 8.2% of participants. Regarding Race/Ethnicity, information was missing and not available for 8.2% of participant. Regarding Sexual Orientation, information was missing and not available for 8.3% of participants.  Characteristics  N            M (SD)  %   Age   49    19.1. 19.89 (1.39)           - Year in School           Freshmen 14   28.6      Sophomore 13   26.5      Junior 12   24.5      Senior 6    12.2 Race/Ethnicity          Caucasian 37   75.5      Egyptian 2    4.1      Asian American 1    2.0      African American 1    2.0      Mixed Ethnicity  4   8.2 Sexual Orientation           Heterosexual 28   57.1      Homosexual 3   6.1      Bisexual 1   2.0      Other 2   4.1 60  3.5.2 Phase II 3.5.2.1 Procedure for Participant Recruitment. The recruitment strategy for Phase II included public posting: physically on the UBC campus and online. Posters advertising the study would have been posted in student and study spaces on campus (e.g., student union building, learning centre, libraries, counselling centres, UBC Men’s Centre). Individual UBC professors, whose subject area is similar to that of the present study (e.g., gender studies, cross-cultural psychology) would have been contacted and asked to distribute the poster/email advertising the study to their students. UBC department (Department of Counselling Psychology, Educational Psychology, and Special Education; Department of Psychology) and student organization (e.g., Education Student Association; Psychology Student Association) list-serves, websites, and social media accounts (e.g., Facebook; Twitter) would have been contacted and utilized to advertise the study. The study was also to be advertised on the principal investigator’s lab website and Facebook page. Paper and electronic advertisements for the study would have been posted to recruit participants through online classifieds, community organizations and online discussion groups (e.g., Reddit). Appendix B.3 and B.4 contains a sample recruitment email and poster, respectively. All interested participants would have been asked to contact the co-investigator directly using the principal investigator’s lab email address. Once e-mail contact was established, more information regarding the study, including time and location of the study would have been discussed. If the posted time of the focus group was not convenient for interested participants, the researcher may have suggested a new time for all participants according to their availabilities.  3.5.2.2 Participants. A survey representing the student demographics at UBC was completed in 2012. 39% of students were described as White, 35% as Chinese, 9% as South Asian, 5% as 61  Korean, 2% as Japanese, 1% as Aboriginal, and 7% as other. If recruitment was to occur at UBC, care would have been taken to ensure the sample was reasonably representative (Todd, 2017). 3.6 Data Gathering Materials 3.6.1 Materials 3.6.1.1 Phase I.  3.6.1.1.1 Focus Group Questions. Each focus group session was composed of open ended, semi-structured interview questions. These questions dealt with issues of masculinity, resilience, and help-seeking behaviour. Example questions included: what kind of man do you want to be in the future? What helps you become that man?  See Appendix D.1 for a list of the exact questions used during the focus group sessions. Across focus groups, the general wording of the questions remained consistent, however, the research group facilitators were given the freedom of modifying questions and including prompts that would aid in conversational flow and encourage multiple view-points. Focus group data was collected using an audio recording device.  3.6.1.1.2 Focus Group Facilitators. The first set of focus groups were each facilitated by two to three male-identified mental health (e.g., psychologist) or related university social services workers. Each researcher held at least a Master’s degree in the mental health or social service field.  3.6.1.1.3 Demographics Questionnaires. A demographics survey was administered following the focus group session. The questionnaire asked participants about their age, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, university standing, weekly participation of campus/student activities and the use of available services on campus. See Appendix C for the Demographics Questionnaire.  62  3.6.1.2 Phase II. 3.6.1.2.1 Focus Group Questions. If one or more additional focus group were needed to fully explore the research question and were not fully elaborated enough to develop a ground theory (i.e., theoretical sampling), questions addressed in these groups would have been composed of open ended, semi-structured interview questions that focused on the concept of possible masculinities more directly and explicitly. If needed, exact questions would have been determined during the analysis of Phase I data. Exact questions for subsequent rounds of data collection are impossible to create before the first phase of data analysis was complete. It is the analysis that generates the specific future questions (or lack thereof).  While the exact wording of questions was impossible predict during study planning, the researcher created some possible questions that may have emerged, given that she possessed (and had already repeatedly reviewed) the recorded audio and transcripts from the focus groups in Phase I prior to completing data analyses of data in phase I. These possible questions were partially informed by her developing theoretical sensitivity to the concept of possible masculinities through her review of the literature on possible masculinities. See Appendix D.2 for a list of possible questions that the researcher created during study planning. Some example questions were inspired by Davies et al. (2010)’s concept of possible masculinities: what kind of man do you want to be in the future? What do you require to meet your developmental needs? What does the community need from men to foster safety and health? In the end, Phase II did not occur as theoretical saturation was reached during Phase I. In other words, the researcher had no new questions or inquiries resulting from the analysis of the data in Phase I and determined no new data needed to be collected (i.e., Phase II was not warranted).  63  3.6.1.2.2 Focus Group Facilitators. If additional focus groups needed be collected, it would be facilitated by two male-identified graduate students in counselling psychology. This decision was made because there is evidence to suggest that a female group leader (i.e., a female person of authority) can impact the group processes and this would have been different from the situation in Phase I data collection. For example, Davis-Gage (2011) illustrate how all-male groups may be more uncomfortable with the presence of a female in the group. This would thus prevent this extraneous variable from influencing the data (i.e., gender of group facilitator), and therefore, focus group facilitators would have been kept consistent with Phase I (i.e., both male-identified group facilitators).  The limitation of not conducting the focus group herself is that the present researcher would have been further removed from data collection. By not collecting Phase II data, there would have been a chance that the researcher may not have had the opportunity to ask all the follow up questions she would have liked to and might have missed some non-verbal communication occurring during the focus group. To minimize this limitation, the focus groups would have been audio recorded to capture some additional data that would be lost since the present researcher would not have conducted the focus groups herself (e.g., tone of voice). However, if two focus groups were needed, she would have also analyzed the data in the first focus group prior to the second focus and provided specific guidance and questions to the focus group facilitators; and this would have lessened the impact of not facilitating the focus groups herself. 3.6.1.2.3 Demographics Questionnaire. The demographics questionnaire for Phase II would have been be identical to Phase I. The questionnaire would have asked participants about their age, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, university standing, weekly participation of 64  campus/student activities and the use of available services on campus. See Appendix C for the Demographics Questionnaire. 3.6.2 Procedure 3.6.2.1 Phase I. Each focus group took place in a confidential area on the campus of WWU. These places included common rooms in residence halls or the student union building. The duration of the focus group was approximately two hours. Each of the eight focus groups ranged from having 1-8 participants. During the study, participants were offered refreshments.  Consent procedures were administered first. Co-facilitators reviewed a consent form with the group of participants. Topics reviewed included: description of the study, expected benefits and risks, available campus counselling resources, data collection and storage procedures, and the right to discontinue participation at any time without penalty. Participants signed two copies of the consent form – one for themselves, and one for the researcher’s records.  Following consent procedures, the facilitators of the study gave a short introduction of themselves and established group norms. Participants were explained the importance of confidentiality and the need for safe and respectful communication. Participants were further encouraged to express diversity in their perspectives. At this point, the facilitators began asking questions related to the topic of the study. Pre-planned questions were related to masculinity, resilience, help-seeking behaviours and future prospects (e.g., what does being/identifying as a man/male mean to you? What do you think it means to be resilient? How do you ask for help? What kind of man do you want to be in the future? See Appendix D.1 for a full list of main questions) Facilitators were given the freedom of asking follow-up questions to participants for clarity and completeness of responses. Focus 65  group data was collected by audio recording. Consent forms and audio recordings were stored on password protected computers and in filing cabinets of a locked office.  After discussing the focus group questions, participants were debriefed: they were thanked for their participation and provided with campus health resources. Participants completed a demographics survey listing information including age, sexual orientation, race, and what year of their degree program they were in. Interviews were transcribed from focus group audio using a transcription guide (see Appendix G).  3.6.2.2 Phase II. The procedure for the second phase of the data collection for theoretical sampling purposes, if needed, would have followed a similar order and take place on the campus of the UBC in a confidential meeting room. Like in Phase I, the length of the focus group would have been approximately 1-2 hours.  Consent procedures, introductions and the establishment of group norms would have been identical to Phase I (please refer to section 1.5.2.1 Phase I). After these procedures were completed, the facilitators would have begun asking questions related to possible masculinities. Similar to Phase I, facilitators would have been given the freedom of asking follow-up questions to participants for clarity and completeness of responses. Focus group data would have been collected by audio recording. Consent forms and audio recordings would have been stored in a secure, password protected computer and locked filing cabinets in a locked office room.  After discussing the focus group questions, participants would have been debriefed. They would have been thanked for participating, provided with campus resources (see Appendix E) and informed about how results from the focus groups would be disseminated. Participants would then be asked to complete the demographics questionnaire. See Appendix C for the 66  Demographics Questionnaire. Interviews would have been transcribed from focus group audio using the same transcription guide from Phase I (see Appendix G). 3.7 Data Analysis The collected data was analyzed according to Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) approach to GT. All basic concepts related to Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) approach were incorporated into the analysis and will be described next, with examples from the data to further clarify what was done in the data analytic procedures. Data analysis will be broken into Phase I and Phase II. For Phase I, the concept of constant comparison will be discussed first. Next, an explanation of the coding paradigm (open, axial, and selective) used will be provided (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Finally, the conditional/consequential matrix, memo writing, and diagramming tool that assisted with building the resulting model, are discussed. In Phase II, the procedure of theoretical sampling will be addressed. Note that because theoretical saturation was reached during Phase I, there was no need to complete Phase II and conduct theoretical sampling. Nevertheless, theoretical sampling is a basic aspect of GT and will still be discussed. Constant comparison, the coding paradigm, conditional/consequential matrix, memos and diagramming would have occurred in Phase II as well.  3.7.1 Phase I  3.7.1.1 Constant Comparison. Constant comparison is the process of consistently comparing your data to each other (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). As you are collecting data, you are consistently comparing what you find with each other, and when you are doing analysis, you are consistently comparing data with emergent codes and categories (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, Kenny & Fourie, 2014). Related to the present study, the second focus group’s data was compared with the first group’s data and analysis. The third focus group’s data was compared with the first and second 67  group’s data and analysis, and so on. The raw data was then analyzed line by line and given a label (Glaser and Holton, 2004.) Codes were collected and organized into categories. Codes were compared with codes and with emergent categories. Categories were compared with each other, and the resulting emerging theory (composed of these categories) was compared with literature (see Chapter 5 Discussion). Eventually the constant comparison of the categories led to the core concept (i.e., envisioning possible masculinities), and the generation of a novel model grounded in data (i.e., the Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model) (Glaser & Holton, 2004; Kenny & Fourie, 2014). 3.7.1.2 Coding. With the inclusion of the axial coding procedure in Strauss and Corbin’s approach, which differentiates it from Glaser’s approach, the procedure looks much more complicated, but is argued to be necessary to fully capture phenomena (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The Straussian coding procedure goes as follows: (1) Open Coding, (2) Axial Coding, (3) Selective Coding, and finally, the use of a (4) Conditional Matrix. The conditional matrix is not a step in coding, but an aid to develop categories (Kenny & Fourie, 2015). Each step is described next.  3.7.1.2.1 Open Coding. During open coding, the researcher coded segments of the data with representative conceptual labels. Through constant comparative analysis, categories were created by grouping conceptually similar codes. Categories were also combined to created higher-order, more abstract categories. Strauss and Corbin (1990) specify that each category must be developed and saturated in relation to properties (features) and dimensions (ranges) (Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Kenny & Fourie, 2015). Properties refer to the “characteristics that define and describe the category,” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p. 159) and dimensions refer to the “variations within properties that give specificity and range” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p. 159). In other 68  words, the categories must be explored fully (i.e., saturated) by identifying its features and the range of those features. By the end of open coding, all the data was looked at and coded in this fashion. By this time, some general themes began to emerge. An example of open coding is illustrated in Table 2.                      69  Table 2 Example Excerpt from Data with Open Codes  Focus Group #1 Date: November 7, 2013 Participant 1 Text  Open Codes  “I want to be like the opposite of my dad. Like growing up my dad was just like the most emotionally detached person ever and I don’t know, I want to be like really supportive of my kids, and I want them to, I felt like I could never come to my dad for things because he was just like so emotionally just detached from everything and it made me feel really uncomfortable. So, I want people to be able to come to me and know that I’m like a safe person to talk about what’s wrong with them, and I feel like the way to do that is to just openly admit to the people around me like how I’m actually feeling.” - opposite of dad, growing up, childhood/adolescence, family context, relationship with parent, relationship with father, father’s characteristics/actions    - supportive, supportive of kids, have kids, fatherhood, role     - dad emotional detached, made me feel uncomfortable      - safe person, want people to come up to me, hoped for self   - openly admit my feelings, hoped for self, behaviour, belief   The next step is to explore the relationships between these themes, which is done during the next stage of coding: Axial Coding. While Strauss and Corbin (1990) describe open and axial coding as separate stages of coding, they often occur alongside one another, instead of one after 70  another. Therefore, in Table 2, there are some more basic in-vivo codes (i.e., codes that use participant’s actual words instead of the researcher’s words in attempt to keep the final conceptualization as close to the data as possible) such as, “opposite of dad,” “safe person,” and “openly admit my feelings,” as well as more higher-level codes such as, “family context,” “roles,” “behaviours,” and “beliefs.” Higher-level coding appeared during multiple rounds of open and axial coding.  3.7.1.2.2 Axial Coding. The purpose of Axial Coding is the “forging” of links between categories and emerging sub-categories (Kenny & Fourie, 2015). Strauss and Corbin (1990) offered the “The Paradigm Model” as a tool to guide researchers with connecting categories and sub-categories. The Paradigm Model provides a framework for the researcher to more fully explore the categories created during coding systematically. To do this, a researcher must consider the (a) causal conditions (b) context, (c) intervening conditions, (d) action/interactional strategies and (e) consequences (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) of the categories and the overall emerging phenomenon.   When considering casual conditions, the present researcher coded what events or incidences may have influenced that category. Next, she looked for data related to context (i.e., where/when the phenomenon took place). When she looked for intervening conditions, she looked for what may have been needed to be done before the phenomenon occurred. Questions she asked herself were: are there precipitating events that must occur? Are there specific resources that are required to experience the phenomenon? Questions she asked herself when considering the action/interactional strategies related to the phenomenon included: “who else is involved in the phenomenon? Why are they involved? Finally, when considering the consequences of the phenomenon, the researcher looked for the outcomes or results of the 71  phenomenon in the data. This process “reconfigures” and “refashions” sub-categories into some conceptual categories, and overarching categories emerge (Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Kenny & Fourie, 2015).  Once this was done over and over again with the different emergent categories, leading to more fully explored categories, the researcher was better able to see connections between the categories and create even higher-level categories or related the categories together. For example, after comparing codes such as “experience with father,” “grandpa told me,” “guys in my class,” “my girl friend,” it became apparent that social experiences within the family, school, or friend groups were important for envisioning possible masculinities. When integrating literature into this process, social groups, family experiences and school could be subsumed or connected as a “microsystem” (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). The reader will notice that microsystem is a property of the core concept (see Chapter 4). In this example, the researcher explored the context (e.g., family context, school context, peer context) and action/interactional strategies (e.g., interactions with father, grandpa, guys in class, a female friend) from the Paradigm Model.  Most of the coding at this stage took place in three areas: using NVivo (See Appendix I for a screenshot of NVivo), Microsoft Excel (See Appendix J for a screenshot of Excel) and by hand (physically writing out codes and moving them around on a table) (See Appendix K for a photo of some hand draw paper cards used to physically sort codes).  3.7.1.2.3 Selective Coding. Selective Coding functions to integrate categories into one core category and create a GT (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). After the core category was chosen through the rounds of open and axial coding (i.e., envisioning possible masculinities), the researcher engaged in five steps to develop it. First, a short general descriptive overview of the core phenomenon using analytical terms (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) was written. Second, the Paradigm 72  Model was re-visited to begin relating the core category to its sub-categories. Third, categories were related to each other dimensionally. Forth emerging relationships were compared with the data. If necessary, categories needing further “refinement” would have been addressed using theoretical sampling (see Phase II) (Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Kenny & Fourie, 2015).  At this point, there were several contextual factors that were somewhat related to the consequences (e.g., envisioned possible masculinities). It appeared that these contextual factors interacted with each other over time to lead to envisioning different possible masculinities, especially in the form of possible masculinities that men wanted to aspire to or avoid. By engaging in selective coding, the researcher was able to add the processes within the model (i.e., movement within the model, see Chapter 4).   3.7.1.3 Conditional/Consequential Matrix. The Conditional/Consequential Matrix helped to summarize and integrate open, axial, and selective coding (Kenny & Fourie, 2015). The conditional matrix is an analytic tool that assists researchers in “identifying the breadth of determining conditions and consequences related to the subject of study” (Kenny & Fourie, 2015, p. 1277). The matrix includes the following levels of influences: (1) Action Pertaining to Phenomenon, (2) Interaction, (3) Group, Individual, Collective, (4) Sub-Organizational, Sub-Institutional Level, (5) Organizational and Institutional Level, (6) Community, (7) National, and (8) International (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). By identifying the determining conditions and consequences at these eight levels of influence, the researcher had a better understanding of the micro- and macro-context of the phenomenon.  Using the conditional matrix led to it informally being a part of the model itself (i.e., in Part II in the form of Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Theory of Human Development). You’ll notice the aspects of the conditional/consequential matrix corresponds to the Bio-Ecological Theory of Human Development (see Chapter 4). For 73  example, “individual” from the matrix, is the most inner circle of the Bio-Ecological Theory, “interaction” from the matrix, occurs throughout the Bio-Ecological Theory, “community” from the matrix is part of the Bio-Ecological Theory’s microsystem, and “organizational/institutional” from the matrix, is part of Bio-Ecological Theory’s macrosystem.  3.7.1.4 Memoing. Memo writing is simply the written record of analysis (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The researcher recorded her reflections and deliberations as concepts began emerging through the process of coding and constant comparison (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The memos were gathered together when formulating the theory (Kenny & Fourie, 2014). The inclusion of systematically writing memos keeps the researcher reflexive in the process (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). It is similar to the process of writing in a “researcher’s journal.” As an example, below is an excerpt of a memo that the researcher wrote during her analysis. Appendix H has additional examples of memoing.   Memo Example 1: Demonstrating Contextual Factors Influencing Possible Masculinities  This group (FG 7) didn't go too much into what masculinity really is...but they did talk a lot about how their idea of what it means to be a man is really influenced by their surroundings, especially at college. They seem to be talking about how college makes them more likely to be reflexive about their gender thoughts. I guess the fact of just being on the college campus and taking college classes is helpful on their reflections. Would men in this environment think about different kinds of possible masculinities? Participant 1 (FG 7) also points out that not having a Greek system is positive because it doesn't reaffirm traditional male ideals. They do point out there are other avenues on campus that would do that, like intermural sports. So even within the context of the college, there is also a context of the Greek system/intermural (peer groups as a category?) and how it impacts how a man sees himself. There was a running theme in this interview, as well as in the previous ones I have read: that the men in these interviews feel like the vibe itself at the WWU or even Bellingham in general is different. Makes me think about a societal force contributing to how they think about themselves. But what about the future… Participants in FG 7 comment on WWU being a different kind of environment, one that is generally more liberal, so that they may not 74  actually have traditional definitions of what it means to be a man. Participant 1 (FG 7) even comments on the changing times and the changing ideas over time…so time is also a factor? He says, “I think on the, on the independence front, our our generation and generations coming up right now is like, we’re got this while concept of emerging adulthood that’s coming about between like the economic downturn and just like being more financially dependent on our parents, our loans, or external forces and stuff longer into our 20s that runs, especially counter to the classic male like stereotype of being this independent bread winner like immediately out of high school and and what not. That, that, that creates a lot of conflict in my life I would say.” Then they began to talk about what they wanted to be in the future, Participant 3 said “I guess to overcome this unwillingness to make myself vulnerable. And part of, part of that’s help seeking, part of that is showing emotional and…wanting to build more meaningful relationships and not being afraid to open up to another person.” Given the experiences of facing challenges getting help, the men talk about that as something they hope for themselves in the future (e.g., being help-seeking and vulnerable). Could gendered experiences with women and gendered experiences with men be categories?   3.7.1.5 Diagramming. Diagrams are a visual representation of relationships that may exist between analytic concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Diagrams were used as a way to organize data, assisted in explaining the findings and helped the abstraction of concepts and categories from the data level (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Majority of the diagrams that the researcher created took the form of flow charts. Taken together with memos, diagramming can “stimulate and document the analytic thought processes and provide direction for theoretical sampling,” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p.139). Figures 1, 2, and 3 show examples of diagramming created in earlier stages of analysis.       75  Figure 1  Example of Diagramming during Early Stage Analysis, April 26, 2019            76  Figure 2 Example of Diagramming during Middle Stage of Analysis, May 1, 2019           77  Figure 3 Example of Diagramming during End Stage Analysis, May 4, 2019   3.7.1.6 Summary of Analysis in Phase I. Overall, the researcher went through an iterative coding process using the Straussian coding procedure. At first, she read and re-read focus group interviews numerous times purely for understanding its content. She also listened to audio files of the interviews to enhance understanding. Next, she engaged in a process of open and axial coding, where she was able to code the interviews line-by-line to brainstorm several hundred codes, and compare them to each other, eventually abstracting the codes into lower- and high-level categories. At this time, tentative connections were made with the higher-level categories through selective coding. These tentative connections led to preliminary models (as evidenced 78  through the diagrams presented earlier in the chapter). Through peer debriefing, the researcher was challenged to look at the data in different ways, leading to other tentative models coming up during analysis. When other tentative models came up, the researcher went back to compare with the data, and engage in another round of coding. This iterative process of coding, creating a model, getting feedback and coding again occurred several times until theoretical saturation occurred (see section 3.6.2.1.1 for an explanation of how theoretical saturation occurred) and the researcher was able to choose a tentative model that best fit the focus group interview data. Throughout the research process, the present researcher symbolically interacted with the concept of possible masculinities through reviewing and analysing the focus group data. Through the research process, the way the researcher interacted with the concept of possible masculinities changed from what it was at the start to what it became in the end. For example, when the researcher first began the research process, her understanding of possible masculinities were limited to the literature written on it (e.g., Davies et al., 2010). As she engaged with what she read in the literature, and then began reading and analyzing the data, her idea about the concept of possible masculinities changed and expanded to include two categories of possible masculinities (i.e., an internal domain and external domain, see Chapter 4).  3.7.2 Phase II 3.7.2.1 Theoretical Sampling. Glaser and Strauss (1967) describe theoretical sampling as a method of data collection that is dictated by initial analysis (looking at concepts and themes) of data. As data are initially coded and categorized, gaps will often become evident. At this point, the researcher will collect more data and continue analysis. As new concepts emerge, more data may be collected to gain an in-depth examination of the concept (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Kenny & Fourie, 2014). Subsequent data is collected until evidence of saturation occurs. Saturation 79  occurs when no new data emerges from data collection (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Corbin and Strauss (2008) write, “the purpose of theoretical sampling is to collect data from places, people, and events that will maximize opportunities to develop concepts in terms of their properties and dimensions, [it] uncovers variations and [identifies] relationships between concepts” (p. 144).  Because data collection depends on initial analysis, all data is not ideally collected at the beginning of the study, and there is no set amount of data that needs to be collected. Ideally, the first focus group will be run to collect data. Researchers will then analyze the data to determine initial concepts and categories. Researchers will then go back and run a second focus group and repeat the process of analysis. This can go on for many rounds until the researchers finds that no new data is emerging from their focus groups.  Data collection need not be collected all from the same site. Researchers can purposefully gather data related to emergent categories revealed during analysis (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). This point highlights the present researcher’s preparedness of potentially collecting data from the UBC in addition to WWU. Potential benefits of collecting data from a second, similar site (i.e., UBC) include the ability to obtain saturation. In other words, if the previously collected data (at WWU) did not reach saturation, there would have been an opportunity to collect more data from a sufficiently similar site. An example further describes the use of an additional setting for data collection: if in the analysis of the data, it is found that variables related to first year experiences in college shape one’s academic resiliency, a researcher could do more focus groups with first year students to fully capture the properties and dimensions of the concept. In other words, if it became evident that important perspectives were missing in Phase I, there was an opportunity to capture these with additional data gathering at UBC. In the end, theoretical saturation was 80  reached during Phase I of the study, and therefore Phase II, along with theoretical sampling, was not conducted or necessary.  3.7.2.1.1 Theoretical Saturation. Theoretical saturation was demonstrated in two ways: (a) through an internal perspective, and (b) through an external perspective. To the present researcher, theoretical saturation occurred when she was able to determine from a set of tentative and competing models, which model fit the data, and therefore explained the data in the best way. This occurred shortly after a meeting the researcher had with her research supervisor and committee member. A memo is included in Appendix H that reflects on this meeting. Another way that theoretical saturation was met from an internal perspective was when no new codes or categories emerged when the researcher was looking at the data. Through an external perspective, theoretical saturation occurred through two tests: (i) through the external audit, and though (ii) peer debriefing. The purpose of these tests, or procedures, was to identify any large gaps or misunderstandings from the data. Feedback from the external audit (see Appendix M) and peer debriefing was incorporated into the final model and contributed to theoretical saturation.  3.7.2.2 Constant Comparison, Coding, Matrix, Memoing, and Diagramming. The data that would have been collected in Phase II would have gone through the same treatment as Phase I: constant comparison, coding, conditional/consequential matrix, memoing, and diagramming. See previous sections for full descriptions of these concepts.  3.8 Ethical Issues 3.8.1 Phase I At the onset of the study, participants in Phase I were guided through a consent form to inform them of the purposes, advantages and possible side effects of the study. Participants were 81  given the option to discontinue the study without penalty. The consent form is included in Appendix A.1 for Phase I. All participants who took part in the research were provided with the purpose of the study and consented to have their focus group interviews audio recorded as part of data collection. As compensation, all participants were offered two research credits (relevant for those individuals taking psychology courses requiring research credits) and entered in a draw to win an iTunes gift card. All participants were further offered refreshments during the study as an extra incentive. Dr. Robinder Bedi, who was involved in the original program evaluation, is authorized to conduct research on the focus group transcripts. He gave Ms. Rajeena Kumar (the present researcher) permission to analyze this data for a purpose that is different from what it was originally intended. In other words, the data was collected as part of a program evaluation. Ethical approval for the secondary use of this data was obtained through the University of British Columbia’s Behavioural Ethics Research Board (BREB) (certificate #H19-00179). The focus group transcripts and narrative of demographics from Phase I are anonymized. Dr. Bedi and Ms. Kumar do not have access to a master list (if it even exists) connecting participant codes to the data, making it impossible for them to connect the data to each individual participant.  3.8.2 Phase II Future data collection would have required BREB approval. Future participants were to be similarly provided with the purpose of the study and consent procedures. Confidentiality would have been stressed at this time. Focus groups were planned to be conducted in a private room on the campus of the University of British Columbia. Like in Phase I, participants would have had the opportunity to withdraw from the study at any time. At consent, participants would have indicated if they consented to being contacted as part of a member checking procedure. 82  Like in Phase I, participants would have been debriefed and provided with campus resources if they required additional help. Participants would have been invited to contact the researchers or the university’s BREB if they had any concerns. Participants would have been provided their compensation after completing the debrief procedures, even if they chose not to participate in the study once it began. Research credit would not have been offered as compensation as in Phase I. In attempt to match the compensation of Phase I, in Phase II, participants would have been given a $20 iTunes gift card and be entered in a draw to win a $30 gift card. Participants would have also been offered refreshments (e.g., pizza, sushi). If Phase II was required, Appendix A.2 has a sample consent form that would have been used for consent purposes with participants. Appendix F has a sample honorarium form that would have been used to compensate the participants if Phase II was required.   While there were no foreseeable ethical issues with the specific interview schedule, focus groups themselves have the potential to become an ethical issue. This has to do with the types of interactions that occur within the focus group, and outside of it. For example, during a discussion, one participant’s answers may bring up a strong negative reaction causing distress in another participant. This strong negative reaction may persist during the remainder of the focus group and/or continue after the focus group is over. Had theoretical sampling been required to reach theoretical saturation, the group facilitators would have aimed to use their trained group facilitation skills from their graduate training in group counselling (e.g., blocking counterproductive behaviour) and sensitivity for negative emotions to provide feelings of safety for members and encourage equal contribution of members. However, there was potential that issues may have come up in conversation that could have been triggering for participants. The researcher and focus group facilitators would have made themselves available after focus groups 83  for an extended debrief, if needed, but no counselling relationship would have been established. Instead, participants would have been encouraged to seek services from the list of resources provided to them during the debrief if needed. See Appendix E for the resource list that participants would have received during Phase II.    Participants’ information would have been kept securely on a password protected computer as an encrypted file. Consent forms would have been kept in a locked cabinet in a locked office and audio files kept on a password protected computer. Identifying information would have been removed during the transcription process (see Appendix G for Transcription Key) and maintained during analysis.  3.9 Conditions and Criteria for Rigor and Credibility  Corbin and Strauss (2008) provide nine conditions to foster quality research, and ten criteria for judging quality research. Some researchers (e.g., McCullough, 2016) have found it helpful to categorize the nine conditions into two types: structural and personal. “Structural conditions” deal with planning and executing the study and “personal conditions” are related to the researcher’s capability (McCullough, 2016). These research fostering conditions will be discussed first, followed by the ten criteria for judging quality research.  3.9.1 Conditions to Foster Quality Research 3.9.1.1 Structural Conditions.  3.9.1.1.1 Clarity of Purpose at Start of Research. Corbin and Strauss (2008) stress the importance of distinguishing at the outset of your research process, if you are aiming for description or theory/model generation. The purpose of the present research was to create a theory grounded in research that helped to explain how men construct their possible masculinities. This purpose was kept at the forefront of the researcher’s mind as she analyzed the 84  focus group data. At the end of the analysis, the researcher created a model that illustrated how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. Therefore, the end result of the research was in line with its purpose.  3.9.1.1.2 Methodological Consistency and Methodological Awareness. Corbin and Strauss (2008) maintain that the highest degree of credibility is ensured if a researcher chooses a particular method and follows it faithfully. This prevents the mixing of procedures that may originate from philosophically different approaches, thus lowering the credibility of research. GT has now been approached from multiple epistemological stances: post-positivism, pragmatism, symbolic interactionism, social constructionism, and social constructivism. Each stance comes with its own set of procedures. Mixing these procedures is not ideal. This researcher followed the Straussian approach to GT by undertaking all relevant procedures designed for this approach. Methodological awareness is defined as recognizing the impact of decisions made during the research process (Seale, 2002). Forecasting potential criticisms can help a researcher engage in data collection and analysis in a credible way. Criticisms were kept in mind by the researcher while attending to methodological issues. These criticisms not only emerged from the researcher herself, but through conversations and meetings with her thesis supervisor and committee members.  3.9.1.1.3 Hard Work. A researcher’s commitment to engaging in hard work is essential in building a credible theory. Corbin and Strauss (2008) remind researchers that qualitative work takes considerable time and thought. For the present study, the researcher put in considerable time and energy in creating a theory that was credible.  85  3.9.1.2 Personal Conditions. 3.9.1.2.1 Self-Awareness and Reflexivity. To foster quality research, researchers must recognize that as an “interpreter,” findings risk becoming coloured by one’s own biases and assumptions (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Becoming and remaining aware of one’s own biases and assumptions can help a researcher recognize how much her findings are influenced by personal characteristics. While it is impossible to completely account for one’s influence, undertaking in certain exercises can help. This researcher kept a journal of her reactions and feelings during the research process to help acknowledge this influence. Her training as a graduate student in counselling psychology helped prepare her to be highly aware of her reactions and feelings to the data. Not only are students in counselling psychology encouraged to pay attention to their emotional response, with and without clients, several of the counselling courses she took incorporated exercises that helped to build this awareness. One such course was “Cross-Cultural Counselling,” where the researcher was required to critically examine their privilege, values, patterns of thought and behaviour and how they influenced her interpretations. See section 3.2 Reflexivity and Theoretical Sensitivity for more information regarding this condition.  3.9.1.2.2 Training. To foster credible research, Corbin and Strauss (2008) maintain that a researcher should be trained in qualitative research. One way this researcher prepared herself to undertake qualitative research was by completing graduate level coursework in qualitative research. During that class, the researcher catered her assignments to focus her learning on GT, especially Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) approach. Further, as a graduate student in counselling psychology, this researcher had extensive training and practice in conversation skills that emphasized empathy, unconditional positive regard, and respect. These skills, combined with the group processing skills and group interaction analysis experiences (acquired from a course on 86  group counselling), the researcher had the necessary skills to conduct successful focus group research if needed.     3.9.1.2.3 Empathy and Sensitivity to Research Participants. Attempting to fully capture the richness of data, researchers need to “be able to step into the shoes of participants,” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Credibility is established when a researcher is able to empathically and respectfully capture clients’ experiences. This researcher’s training in counselling, and self-identified ability to foster relatedness with clients and providing an empathic presence, was a good fit for enhancing credibility in qualitative research.  3.9.1.2.4 Creativity. The ability to approach qualitative research with creativity is important to foster credibility. Corbin and Strauss (2008) emphasize the usefulness of being able to think about things differently. Being flexible and open-minded are characteristics that the researcher brought into the research process to help her adequately explore the depth of data. The researcher attributes diagramming as a helpful medium to analysis that fostered creativity.    3.9.1.2.5 Desire to Conduct Research. Corbin and Strauss (2008) underscore that it is essential that researchers have an inherent desire to conduct research in itself, rather than just as a means to an end. The researcher’s value and interest in research started eight years ago when she took a volunteer undergraduate research assistant position. Since then, she has actively sought a variety of research experiences (e.g., experimental research, clinical research, quantitative research, literature and systematic reviews, scholarly writing, research presentations) to build her competencies as a researcher. Being able to work collaboratively with colleagues and participants to create new and innovative research is something that was valued by the researcher.    87  3.9.2 Criteria for Judging Quality Research  Corbin and Strauss’ (2008) “Criteria for judging quality research,” was be used to assess the quality of the analysis. The criteria are as follows: (a) fit, (b) applicability, (c) concepts, (d) contextualization of concepts, (e) logic, (f) depth, (g) variation, (h) creativity, (i) sensitivity, and (j) evidence of memos. The criteria are presented, in line with other grounded theorists (e.g., McCullough, 2016) as: (a) fit and applicability, (b) concepts, contextualization of concepts, and logic, (c) depth and evidence of memos, and (d) variation, sensitivity, and creativity. 3.9.2.1 Fit and Applicability. Fit refers to whether the results resonate with professionals and participants. Applicability relates to whether the results are useful for who it was intended for. Fit was assessed by sharing the resulting model with two members of the lab in which the researcher works in by means of external audits (see Appendix M). In an external audit, an individual who is not associated with the project will evaluate the research process that was undertaken (Creswell, 2014). The research process and outcome were evaluated by (a) a female senior graduate student in counselling psychology who has completed coursework in qualitative methods and has familiarity with qualitative research, and (b) a male research assistant who works in the lab that the researcher works in.  These auditors provided feedback that was incorporated into the study. Had Phase II of data collection been required, the results would have been shared with an estimated 50% of additional group participants (i.e., member checking) to gauge whether results resonated with them and were deemed useful. Member checking is a process where the researchers take their findings (i.e., the resulting GT) to past participants and asks them about how it resonates with them (Creswell, 2014).  3.9.2.2 Concepts, Contextualization and Logic. Concepts refers to whether the results are presented as abstract ideas. Two questions the researcher asked herself through analysis 88  included: “are these concepts adequately contextualized” and “is there a logical flow to the contextualized concepts?” Concepts, contextualization, and logic were assessed by the use of “peer-debriefing.” Peer-debriefing is a process that allows “pairs of eyes to confirm the emerging concepts and categories from raw data,” (Sikolia, Biros, Mason & Weiser, 2013). Peer debriefing occurred throughout the research process as the present researcher met and discussed her emerging model with her research supervisor and research committee. These “peers”7 assisted in detecting problems with over- or under- emphasized points, vague descriptions, or apparent biases/assumptions made by the researcher. They provided the researcher with feedback which was incorporated into the final model. 3.9.2.3 Depth and Evidence of Memos. Depth refers to thick description of data. Thick description can be assessed by following Denzin’s (1989) features of “thick description.” Denzin (1989) states that each observation, event, or behaviour should capture the following information: bibliographical, historical, situational, relational and interactional. Denzin’s (1989) guidelines were used to assess the depth of the resulting model, while paying close attention to maintaining the privacy and confidentiality of research participants. Evidence of reflections and deliberations during analysis were documented as memos (see section 3.6.1.4 Memoing and Appendix H for additional examples of memoing).   3.9.2.4 Variation, Sensitivity, and Creativity. Variation refers to how diverse the data is. Sensitivity refers to how in tune researchers were to the participants’ perspectives. Creativity refers to whether the resulting model created is novel and innovative. Variation and sensitivity  7 Peers are defined as fellow researchers. Therefore, while the present researcher has less research experience compared to her research supervisor and committee members, their roles as researchers make them the present researcher’s peers. This definition was upheld by the second committee member, who also served as the methodology expert on the committee.  89  were assessed through two external audits (see Appendix M). Because Phase I data was previously collected anonymously as part of program development purposes prior to Behavioural Ethics Research Board approval, member checking could not occur with the participants, otherwise, it would also have been done and used to speak to variation and sensitivity. Creativity was assessed by comparing the resulting model with the literature (see Chapter 5). Finally, by using participants’ words in the resulting model (while ensuring confidentiality), sensitivity was demonstrated (Sikolia et al. 2013).  90  Chapter 4: Findings  4.1 Theoretical Overview of Envisioning Possible Masculinities The current model, titled “Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model” (EPMM), aims to explain the processes (i.e., forces) that contribute to how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. EPMM builds on what we know about the general concept of “possible masculinities,” first described by Davies and colleagues in 2010. Specifically, EPMM builds on the first of three parts of the construct of possible masculinities that was developed through clinical experience and literature: “what are men's possible masculinities?” The author believes that this first concept is the most salient of the three because the second and third concepts (i.e., what men require to meet their developmental needs, and what we, as a community, need from men to foster community safety and health) emerge from this first primary concept, and therefore focused on the development of possible masculinities in this study. More specifically, the EPMM illustrates the factors impacting the development of possible masculinities and categorizes possible masculinities into two types (internal and external).  EPMM has three major parts: (a) current masculinity, (b) the forces that contribute to how men envision their possible masculinities, and (c) components of envisioned possible masculinities (see Figure 1). EPMM does not expand on Part A, as the current scholarship on masculinity has primarily focused on this area and there is little need for additional exploratory research due to many excellent models and theories (see Chapter 2). In addition, current masculinity was not part of the original research question of exploring how college age men envision their possible masculinities and is merely presented here to show the continuity between current and future possible masculinities. Part B emerged from the data and illustrates the several factors that contribute to the possible masculinities that men envision. Through data analysis, it 91  was discovered that Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Model of Human Development provided a useful framework to build upon for Part B. In addition, it is worth noting that the Bio-Ecological Model of Human Development was briefly mentioned by the original researchers who first popularly coined the term and published on the concept of possible masculinities (Shen-Miller et al., 2013; Davies et al., 2010). Shen-Miller et al. (2013) integrated the Bio-Ecological Model with the Men’s Centre Approach (Davies et al., 2010) with possible masculinities, focusing on men’s health behaviours, to help practitioners with designing and implementing culturally sensitive interventions with college aged men.  Part C, further clarifies and builds upon the immature concept of possible masculinities by introducing the internal and external domains of masculinities that can be used to characterize the various components of possible masculinities. In doing so, the EPMM builds on the discussion previously started by Shen-Miller et al. (2013) by looking beyond just behaviours.  Overall, EPMM proposes how men move from defining their current masculinities, to how they envision their possible masculinities. In this model, at any point in time, college aged men have an understanding of how they currently understand themselves as men (Part A).  Part B illustrates that various forces (at the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem levels) that contribute to whether men discard, continue, modify or add to their possible masculinities. Critical incidents occur at all systems levels and can more straightforwardly lead men to discard, continue, modify or add to their possible masculinities. In other words, some experiences in a man’s life are so memorable that they more immediately lead them to envision possible masculinities (See 4.3.2.6. Critical Incident(s)). Part C of EPMM describes the different components of possible masculinities (e.g., values, beliefs, roles). See Figure 1 for a visual representation of the EPMM92  Figure 4  Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model  Note. The Chronosystem is denoted using a dotted arrow in the figure above. 93  4.2 Part A: Current Masculinities  As previously mentioned, Part A of EPMM, called Current Masculinities was not formally explored in this study. Its inclusion in the model serves as a way to ground the model in the current state of literature on masculinities (see Chapter 2: Literature Review) and show the connection between current masculinities and future possible masculinities. Much of the literature on masculinities focuses on masculinities as it currently exists. As the present model describes how men envision their possible or future masculinities, it makes sense to include their current masculinities as a starting point in the EPMM. In Figure 1, Current Masculinities, or Part A, serves as a starting point to entering the EPMM, and a placeholder for describing where college age men are at, at any demarcated point in time (i.e., their current masculinities). This literature (about what we know about current masculinities) is described in Chapter 2. Next, we describe Parts B and C of the EPMM.  4.3 Part B: Factors Influencing How Men Envision Possible Masculinities  The second part of the EPMM describes the forces contributing to how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. In other words, EPMM illustrates the various systems of the environment that can impact the way a college aged man envisions his possible masculinities. This model borrows Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Model of Human Development as a way to organize these contributing forces. The Bio-Ecological model is not originally a model directly theorized in context of masculinity but has obvious relevance to the EPMM as it is a general theory of human development.  Because EPMM uses the concepts of the final conceptualization of Bronfenbrenner’s model, a short description of the Bio-Ecological Model is offered next to better contextualize this 94  part of the EPMM. Following this description, a short discussion of how the Bio-Ecological Model emerged as a helpful tool to organize the contributing forces in the EPMM is noted.  4.3.1 Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory of Human Development   Bronfenbrenner proposed the Bio-Ecological Theory of Human Development “to explain how human development occurs, focusing largely on the impact of the context,” (Rosa & Tudge, 2013, p. 244). Bronfenbrenner emphasized the interrelationships of an individual and the various aspects of their environment that contribute to their development. More specifically, Bronfenbrenner described the context, or environment as “an arrangement of four interconnected structures, with those close to the developing individual being enclosed within those further afield,” (Rosa & Tudge, 2013). The four interconnected structures were named: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem, (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). See Figure 5. These structures are described next.             95  Figure 5 Bio-Ecological Theory of Human Development. Based on Bronfenbrenner (2005).    The microsystem is the closest setting to the individual. Examples of this most immediate environment include the home, school, work, peer group, and community of the individual. Within the microsystem, the individual has face to face interactions over time that contribute to their development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).   The mesosystem is defined as the relationships between microsystems in which the developing individual participates (Rose & Tudge, 2013; Bronfenbrenner, 1979). For example, the relationships between an individual’s family and peer group is a mesosystem. Another example is an individual’s family and their interactions with the individual’s school.   The exosystem is defined as the linkages between two or more settings that do not directly contain the individual but can nevertheless directly impact the individual’s development (Hamwey, Allen, Hay, & Varpio, 2019; Bronfenbrenner, 1979). An example of the exosystem is 96  the individual’s parent’s workplace (system one is the parent and system two is the parent’s workplace).   The macrosystem is the largest and most distal structure in the theory. The macrosystem contains the “institutional systems of a culture or sub-culture, such as the economic, social, education, legal or political systems of society” (Rosa & Tudge, 2013, p.247). An example of the macrosystem are social norms within a particular culture that impact the individual.   Bronfenbrenner later introduced the chronosystem into his theory in order to account for development over time. In Bronfenbrenner’s model, the inclusion of time only highlighted what was previously implied, that there are changes in the individual and their context over time (Rosa & Tudge, 2013).   In Bronfenbrenner’s current version of his model, increased attention is paid to describe the characteristics of the individual, including: age, gender, race, ability, knowledge, skills, temperament and motivation, (Hamwey et al., 2019).   As part of the process of constant comparison that is inherent in grounded theory methodology, combined with her theoretical sensitivity to the field of developmental psychology, the present researcher noticed a similarity between the emerging categories and Bronfenbrenner’s already established categories. Bronfenbrenner’s framework emerged as a useful way to organize the present model’s contextual factors that impact how a college aged man envisions his possible masculinities. The Bio-Ecological Model’s influence is evident in the EPMM, especially in Part B. The EPMM borrows the concentric circles of interconnected systems as evident in Figure 5. The present model defines the interconnected systems similarly to how Bronfenbrenner did during the different phases of the Bio-Ecological Theory’s 97  development. Next, examples from the data in the present study will be used to demonstrate the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and the chronosystem.  4.3.2 Factors of Envisioning Possible Masculinities  Part B of the EPMM provides a framework for understanding the factors contributing  to how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. Figure 6 illustrates Part B of the EPMM. Part B takes inspiration from Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Model (1979). An individual is impacted by his microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem, as demonstrated in Figure 6. Critical incidents, or memorable events, occur at all system levels of the environment. First, definitions and examples are provided from the data for individual factors, system levels and critical incidents in Part B. Then a description and examples of the chronosystem are offered, followed by an explanation of the movement within the EPMM. Using Straussian language, the properties of Part B of the model are: individual factors, microsystem factors, mesosystem factors, exosystem factors, macrosystem factors, critical incident(s), and chronosystem/movement within the model. Critical incident(s) and the chronosystem within the EPMM deal with time and thus are subsumed under the heading “Time in the EPMM: Critical Incidents and the Chronosystem.” The dimensions of these properties are covered in their individual sub-sections below.        98  Figure 6 Part B of EPMM, Demonstrating the Individual, Microsystem, Mesosystem, Exosystem, Macrosystem Factors and Critical Incident(s).   4.3.2.1 Individual Factors. Individual factors are personal characteristics that impact the way a college aged man envisions his possible masculinities. Examples of individual factors (i.e., the dimensions of the property of individual factors) include age, race, gender, appearance, temperament, and mental health status (Hamwey et al., 2019). Quotations substantiating the individual factors of age and mental health status are provided below. Participant 3 from Focus Group 1 described the individual factor of mental illness impacting the kind of man he wants to be in the future, specifically describing how his diagnosis of bipolar disorder impacts the kind of man he wants to be in the future: one that has more control of his emotions “I think for me like as a man I want to be in more control of myself. Being bipolar, it’s you know, balancing the emotions, knowing when like to show appropriately, when not to. I wish I could just get rid of it, but it’s with me forever. So, I think, I think self-control 99  is huge. Knowing when to be able to let go and when I can’t and having a firm grasp on that. That’s the kind of man I want to be. Just like my father.” Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 described the individual factor of age impacting his behaviour as a man: “…my first year here, I was a transfer student and lived in the dorms…and stuck with a bunch of freshmen and all these girls were like instantly attracted to me because I was 19 and it turned into like ‘who do I feel like sleeping with tonight.’” This participant describes how his age, an individual factor, impacted the way he thought about himself as a man and his resulting behaviours.  Additional examples for individual factors that emerged from the data can be found in Appendix L.1. 4.3.2.2 Microsystem Factors. The microsystem also contributes to how a college aged man imagines his possible masculinities.  Examples of the microsystem (i.e., dimensions of the property of microsystem factors) include peers, family, school, and workplace (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).  Participant 2 from Focus Group 1 describes his family, specifically his father, as a someone who contributed to his understanding of masculinities: “…the example my father set it was you’re reliable, you’re dependable, you’re also you try to keep balance and I don’t know you just have like a strong inner strength it doesn’t matter if you’re physically strong, it’s just being able to age through day by day without letting it bring you down.”  Participant 5 from Focus Group 3 described his peer group as a contributor to how he thinks about his masculinities:  “Like when I was growing up, you know, I was a little bit young for my grade, I was really kind of kind of a small little guy back in the day. Still pretty wiry now. But you 100  know you hit the age when everyone, boys are growing up, hitting puberty…everyone is fighting each other, and you know wrestling, working out arms everyday stuff like that, it’s almost kind of like a competition a little bit to see who is the strongest you know you want to prove yourself in that way.”8  Participant 1 from Focus Group 7 offers an example of how his involvement in intermural sports and his lack of involvement in a Greek (i.e., Fraternity) system impacted his understanding of his masculinities:  “And it’s, and I mean there’s still some of the same places where stuff like that can spring up. Like intermural sports and stuff like that but even like having, I ref intermurals and play intermurals and it’s, it’s not like that in a way I would expect it to be if there was a Greek system. And I can’t base this off of like going to a school with a Greek system.” Participant 1 from Focus Group 5 described how his microsystem (i.e., dormitory environment) impacted how he could express and see himself as a man: “When I was in the dorms, first year at [omitted for confidentiality purposes], it was very, like I said, very religious. But I wanted, I was like the only gay guy on my floor and it was hard to actually, not that I don’t want to express like being gay, and all the stereotypes that come with that. It’s just that my floor was very broish, and I just felt very, like I felt like there was a wall between us. I wanted to just be who I was and not over the top super feminine or anything like that. But I felt like I had to suppress who I was a bit in the environment that I was in.”  8 In this quote, Participant 5 also acknowledges the individual factors of biology (i.e., puberty) and appearance (i.e., body shape and size) as a contributing factor.   101  Additional examples for microsystem factors can be found in Appendix L.1. 4.3.2.3 Mesosystem Factors. The mesosystem, defined as the interactions between microsystems (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), also can influence the way college aged men think about their possible masculinities. Examples of the mesosystem (i.e., dimensions of the property of mesosystem factors) include the interactions between different peer groups, the interaction between family and peers, and the interaction between family and school. A common example that was brought up during the focus groups was the interactions between different peer groups, which included the interaction between peers in two different fields of study at university.  Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 describes how students in different academic faculties (i.e., liberal arts and chemistry) interact with each other at Western Washington University: “I’m a liberal arts major and every time I mention that to someone they’re just kind of like what so you just read all day and read poetry and stuff like that…it’s weird seeing people’s reactions to my major compared to someone who’s like oh I’m a chemistry major.” This participant alludes to the idea that, at Western Washington University, the different fields of study are associated with their own cultures and stereotypes, and this can impact a man’s understanding of his masculinities.  Participant 2 from Focus Group 5 speaks about the interaction between the community that he grew up in and the particular dormitory at school that he was living in, and how it impacted how he views his gender and sexuality, which impacts how he views his masculinities: “[Name of residence removed for confidentiality], they have a whole floor dedicated to LGBT people, and so my, where I’m from, … it’s not really that oppressive of LGBT but you know, you never talk about it so going to [residence name], you hear every day, well not every day, but you hear more often of people being discriminated based on their 102  sexuality and what not and so you know its kind of definitely open your eyes and you think more of the kind of, make you more, kind of, what’s the term, appreciative…being more appreciate of you know, being a straight male. I’m appreciative that I don’t have to go through the discrimination but then you as well get the sympathy for these other individuals who don’t have the same mindset as you, but you learn, you know that it doesn’t really matter what anybody else thinks…”  Additional examples from the participants substantiating the mesosystem factors can be found in Appendix L.1. 4.3.2.4 Exosystem Factors. The interactions that take place between two or more settings that the individual does not directly participate in, known as the exosystem, can also indirectly impact the way university aged men envision their possible masculinities. An example of the exosystem (i.e., dimension of the property of exosystem factors) is the impact of a parent’s workplace on how a man thinks about his possible masculinities.   Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 described the indirect impact of his father’s career on how he understands masculinities: “I was in a really interesting background because my father he was a professional football player so he came from this a masculine background as you can probably imagine. And it was interesting because he never pushed me too hard for that stereotype because he said it was never really that important to him when he was going through it.”  Participant 3 from Focus Group 1 speaks about the impact of a riot that occurred in his neighborhood, for which he was directly not a participant of, on how he views masculinities:  “My grandpa made this comment to me like a long time ago. We were talking about like people who hire garden crews. And he said a real man is someone who mows his own 103  lawn and takes care of his own garden. I forget about this for the longest time until the night of the riot actually. I live right by where that took place. I saw it happen and for some weird reason I thought of that. And a real man is someone who takes pride in where he comes from and doesn’t destroy his own property and seeks to help his community and do what he can and does what he can for the person next to him.” This example illustrates the impact of the exosystem on the way a college age man thinks about masculinities. Note that this example is also described as a critical incident (see section 4.3.2.6.) Additional examples for exosystem factors can be found in Appendix L.1. 4.3.2.5 Macrosystem Factors. The property macrosystem, the most distal system to the individual, includes the following dimensions: cultural norms and values resulting from institutional systems of culture or subculture (e.g., social, economic, education, legal, political). The macrosystem was found to reportedly impact how men envision their possible masculinities.   Participant 3 from Focus Group 1 described how society, specifically Western society “wants” men to not display their emotions:  “I mean its’s almost like society wants you as a man to not really display your emotions to kind of turn that side of you off. Now to really keep that out of your head. Well at least a lot of aspects of society I think encourage that. I mean football. For example, I love the sport but it’s all about if you get injured rub some dirt on it and keep playing don’t think about it don’t analyze it just do it you know. I think society is all about that for men, as least Western society.” Participant 1 from Focus Group 8 speaks about how mass media impacts how men think about masculinities. He describes society’s depictions as “stereotypical”: 104  Well in the media there are a lot of depictions on what masculine is and of course it’s all very stereotype, I’m sure we’re all aware of what of what we see in the media of typically the muscular guy or the guy who is athletic maybe or being in the military. I think it’s really interesting to me that men are required to sign up for the draft when they are 18.”  Participant 3 from Focus Group 8 further describes society’s view of men, in comparison to women:  “…society’s view, society kinda views everything concrete and you know if you were given a list of qualities, it either goes to a man or women, if they’re like opposites almost. And in my mind it’s always kind been more of like men and women, it’s a different direction, but they’re not necessarily opposites. You can have qualities that are in both. It’s a lot more flexible than I guess the way society views it.”9  Additional examples of macrosystem factors can be found in Appendix L.1. 4.3.2.6 Time in the EPMM. The dimension of time occurs in the EPMM within critical incident(s) and the chronosystem, each of which are defined in detail below. It is important to note that the impact of the chronosystem on envisioning possible masculinities is subtler and more gradual (e.g., repeated interactions with a father figure during childhood) whereas critical incidents(s) are typically one or two salient moments in a limited time period (e.g., a riot that  9 This example also demonstrates Participant 3’s individual factor of using critical thinking skills to challenge society’s dichotomous gender roles. 105  occurred in the community that brought up a specific memory) that have a relatively stronger and perhaps a more pervasive impact on envisioning possible masculinities.   4.3.2.6.1 Critical Incident(s). In the model, critical incident(s) are defined as a past experience that has had a particularly strong memorable or impactful influence on a man related to his masculinities. Critical incidents can occur at all system levels (i.e., microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem). When a man experiences a critical incident, as defined in the EPMM, it strongly and pervasively impacts how he envisions his possible masculinities.  Two examples of Critical Incidents are offered next. Additional examples of critical incidents reported by the participants are found in Appendix L.1.  In Focus Group 1, Participant 1 spoke about a memory with his grandfather that was brought to the forefront of his mind following an event that occurred in his community (i.e., microsystem) and notably influenced how he envisioned the man he wanted to be (i.e., possible masculinity):  “My grandpa made this comment to me like a long time ago. We were talking about like people who hire garden crews. And he said a real man is someone who mows his own lawn and takes care of his own garden. I forget about this for the longest time until the night of the riot actually. I live right by where that took place. I saw it happen and for some weird reason I thought of that. And a real man is someone who takes pride in where he comes from and doesn’t destroy his own property and seeks to help his community and do what he can and does what he can for the person next to him.”  Participant 5 from Focus Group 3 described how an experience he had with a peer “blew” his mind and impacted the way he thought about gender and his own possible masculinities:  106  “I actually knew a guy, well I mean he identified as a guy, but he was born with like, I think well he was born with a vagina, but he was just like no I’m definitely a guy you know. And he was saving his pennies for an operation, you know pumping himself full of testosterone it’s crazy. I mean like he’s a really nice person, definitely a good friend of mine I met him in Australia. But that to me blew my mind. I guess you know it really is, if you want to be a man, you’re a man. It’s it’s it’s I feel like it’s totally up to you.” Next, we discuss the Chronosystem and the movement within the EPMM from Part A (current masculinities) to Part B (factors affecting possible masculinities) to Part C (envisioned masculinities).  4.3.2.6.2 Chronosystem. Part B of the EPMM includes the chronosystem, a system that was included in Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Model (1979) as a dimension of time in which the individual interacts with his environment. Figure 7 illustrates the chronosystem in the EPMM and the movement within the model (i.e., how the environment impacts how a college age man envisions his possible masculinities from his current masculinities.) Definitions and examples are offered next.         107  Figure 7 Part B of EPMM, Illustrating the Chronosystem and Movement Within the EPMM.   Note. The chronosystem is denoted using a dotted arrow in the figure above. The chronosystem in the EPMM is defined as a nonspecific measure of time during which the individual interacts with the various systems in their environment. Time could include days, months, years, or decades. In the preceding figures the chronosystem is illustrated using dotted lines. In Focus Group 1, Participant 1 offers an example illustrating the chronosystem, using the unit of time of years: “I feel like in college we have this mindset, I have four years to get as drunk and laid as possible and then as soon as I’m done with college, I have to like, actually start a real life and can’t be doing this anymore.”  In Focus Group 7, Participant 1 draws attention to the generational changes that have occurred and how it has changed the way society views men and masculinities:  “I think on the, on the independence front, our our generation and generations coming up right now is like, we’re got this while concept of emerging adulthood that’s coming about between like the economic downturn and just like being more financially dependent on 108  our parents, our loans, or external forces and stuff longer into our 20s that runs, especially counter to the classic male like stereotype of being this independent bread winner like immediately out of high school and and what not. That, that, that creates a lot of conflict in my life I would say.” Further in Focus Group 7, Participant 1 comments on the current time period going through changes, what he calls, a “tumultuous period as far as what it means to be male.” The full example is as follows:  “Well I feel like society is kind of going through, a greater society is going through a bit of a tumultuous period as far as what it means to be male. Like for a time, for a, for a pretty stable period in our country at least past, like there was a more standard by marry definition of what it meant to be like a more idealized male and that current is still really strong I think in our society, but now there are a lot of kind of currents that run counter to that, that are kind of creating, I don’t know uncertainty as to what I see our society wants or things is male and, and I don’t know, for me that has kind of in my personal life, made it feel like it’s more fluid concept than past generations have viewed it.” In the EPMM, while moving from current masculinities to possible masculinities, aspects  of masculinities are either left behind, continued, modified or added to how a college aged man envisions his possible masculinities. Refer to Figure 7. In the following example, Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 described how over the course of his life (i.e., through his adolescence and young adulthood), he added, continued and implies potentially leaving behind aspects of his masculinities:  “…in high school, and growing up and stuff, I always saw the jock guy who like, mistreated women all the time and I was like, I hate that guy, how can someone ever treat 109  women that way, and then after…realizing I have become that guy, I didn’t want to be…I feel like in college, we have this mindset I have four years to get as drunk and laid as possible and then as soon as I’m done with college, I have to like actually start a real life and can’t be doing this anymore.” Participant 1 describes how he adopted an aspect of his masculinities, particularly a behaviour of mistreating women or a jock persona, that he previously “hated.” He goes on to describe how he may continue this aspect over the next four years of his college experience, before leaving it behind.   Participant 1 from Focus Group 4 describes he would like to continue the role of being a leader as he goes through life: “I want to be myself as a leader right now, but I want to continue to be a leader as I grow with the experience that I’m going through.” Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 describes a desire to continue being supportive and adding the ability to be more honest and accepting of his emotions: “I hope to continue to being supportive of other people and being like a good source of stability in other people, I want to be able to be more honest with my present state of emotion and accept it and be willing to admit it.” In this model, it is expected that changes in aspects of masculinities, particularly adding, continuing, modifying or leaving behind aspects, will occur across systems and across time as men continually envision their possible masculinities.  4.4 Part C: Possible Masculinities  Part C of the EPMM describes the various aspects of possible masculinities. Figure 8  illustrates the aspects of possible masculinities that are a part of the EPMM. In this part of the model, we consider the actual envisions that were shaped by Part B of the model. Part C describes the property of possible masculinities. Possible masculinities has two sub-properties 110  (internal domain and external domain). Each sub-property has dimensions that are discussed in their respective sections below. Next, each aspect is defined, and examples are offered from the data for each aspect.                      111  Figure 8 Part C of the EPMM.   4.4.1 Internal Domain  The internal domain of possible masculinities includes possible mental actions, such as beliefs, values and attitudes (BVA). The internal domain of possible masculinities is a sub-property of possible masculinities. BVA are the dimensions of the sub-property of the internal domain of possible masculinities. Beliefs refer to thoughts and assumptions that a man holds to be true or trusts (Schwitzgebel, 2006a). Therefore, possible beliefs are the thoughts that a man anticipates or hopes that he will hold to be true or trust in the future. Values are enduring beliefs toward a specific mode of conduct or end-statement of existence that are prioritized by their degree of emotion, significance and impact (Boudon, 2001; Rockeach, 1973, p.5). Values are inherently desirable, act as guiding principles and are near-universals (i.e., relates to most people in the world) (Roccas & Sagiv, 2017). Therefore, possible values are the enduring beliefs that a man anticipates or hopes that he will have in the future. Attitudes are a summation of beliefs and values and are the predisposition a man has in order to respond positively or negatively toward a specific stimulus (Pratkanis, Breckle, & Greenwald, 2014). Therefore, possible attitudes are the 112  predispositions that a man hopes to have in the future. It is important to note that the mental actions in this category may or may not be stereotypes10. It is reminded to the reader that this model does not distinguish whether the possible mental actions are stereotypes, it just describes them as BVAs (i.e., the internal domain of possible masculinities).  Examples of BVA that men reported from the focus group interviews included: vulnerability, authenticity, mindful/present, emotional toughness/strength, hard work/determination, rational, self-sufficiency, reaching full potential, physical strength, happiness, and confidence. Next, these examples of the internal domain of possible masculinities (BVAs) will be illustrated using quotations taken directly from the focus group data. It is important to note that these are examples from the data and by no means an exhaustive or comprehensive (i.e., saturated) list. These examples serve to merely to illustrate the internal domain of possible masculinities. Other examples of BVAs will surely exist in the broader content domain. Additional examples of this category are available in Appendix L.2.   Participant 3 from Focus Group 7 demonstrated vulnerability as a BVA that he hopes for in the future: “I guess to overcome this unwillingness to make myself vulnerable. And part of, part of that’s help seeking, part of that is showing emotional and…wanting to build more meaningful relationships and not being afraid to open up to another person.”  Authenticity is a BVA that was mentioned by Participant 2 from Focus Group 1: “I think just you know, living your life, you can be an example, just in the small choice you make. And I think that’s really important…So, I think I want to be authentic.”  10 A stereotype is defined as a fixed and overgeneralized belief about something, such as a group or class of people. (Cardwell, 1996). 113  The BVA of being mindful (i.e., focusing one’s awareness on the present moment) was especially highlighted by Participant 2 from Focus Group 1:  “I think maybe taking time to enjoy things too. Because we’re so fast paced in how we live, especially you know in the United States and so I think maybe if we you know, slow down and enjoy those we love, and you know try to spend more time with them. Because you can try to be a provider and you know make money and do all these for them, but if you’re not actually there in the present with them then you don’t really get to enjoy it with them.”  Toughness as a BVA was specifically reported by several participants across focus groups. For example, Participant 3 from Focus Group 1 reported: “you know, I think having the toughness is definitely something that, you know, you never you never want to get rid of that, you never want to lose the ability to keep taking the hits, you know that a big part of being a man, you know, getting back up.”  Another BVA brought up by multiple participants was determination. For example, Participant 2 from Focus Group 1 stated: “I think probably the hard work, and you know, determination, I think I would try to keep those things going…being open minded, strong, not strong willed, but you know determined and hard working.” Being self-sufficient was an example that Participant 5 from Focus Group 3 mentioned: “…someday I want to be like completely you know self-sufficient and not relying on my family at all for for financially anything. You know I want to pay it all back. Pay back all the school and you know all the help I got when I was just like, broke as hell.” The example offers an illustration of financial self-sufficiently.  114  Several participants commented on the BVA of self-actualization. Participant 3 from Focus Group 6 said: “I want to be a man who achieves self-actualization and realizing my full potential and applying myself in a way what I kind of just squeeze every ounce of potential out of me but do it in a way that, helps me to enjoy life but just knowing that I give it my best and that I don’t just kind of skate through life going really mediocre.” Participant 1 stated: “I want to be a man who is, like fulfils his and find finds his full potential while still being open minded but still confident in my views and not judging people on their views. Just being, finding out who I am, finding out what I value in life and pushing myself to get those, those goals and beliefs ingrained in my, in my, in who I am so that I can like motivate myself based on those values and beliefs.”  Confidence and fearlessness were also commented on. Being confident is an example of a BVA of possible masculinities. Participant 3 from Focus Group 8 said: “I’ve always wanted to be more fearless, you know, I mean being confident is one of the things that people associate with being manly and I guess that’s something that I’ve always wanted to be is you know, just like, confident in my endeavors, not fearing or holding back” In this example, you can see how the participant comments on this BVA as a stereotype.  Happiness is a final example shared in this section to illustrate the existence of an internal domain of possible masculinities. Participant 3 from Focus Group 8 reports: “I would almost want to say in the future that I want to be less concerned on what’s successful. And like more concerned on what’s going to make me happy.” Next, the external domain of possible masculinities is described. 115  4.4.2 External Domain  The external domain of possible masculinities includes the possible behaviours or pattern of behaviours that men envision for themselves in the future as men. The external domain of possible masculinities is a sub-property of possible masculinities. Behaviours and roles (BR) are the dimensions of the sub-property of the external domain of possible masculinities. Behaviours are the range of actions and mannerisms made by people in their environment. Included in this category are roles. Roles are a comprehensive pattern of behaviour that are socially recognized. Therefore, possible behaviours and roles, are actions or patterns of actions men hope to act out in the future. It is important to note that some of behaviours in this category may or may not be stereotyped behaviour. It is reminded to the reader, that this model does not distinguish whether the possible behaviours or patterns of behaviours are stereotyped, it just describes them.  Examples of BR pertaining to possible masculinities that men reported from the focus group data included: role model, provider, advocate, leader and gentleman. Next, these examples of BR will be illustrated using quotations taken directly from the focus group interviews. It is important to note that these are examples from the data and by no means an exhaustive or comprehensive (i.e., saturated) list. The examples presented here serve to illustrate the external domain of possible masculinities. Additional examples of this category are available in Appendix L.2. An example of a role that emerged from the data that men hoped for in the future was being a role model. Participant 2 from Focus Group 1 stated, “I think just you know, living your life, you can be an example, just in the small choice you make. And I think that’s really important. Is that you can tell people all these correct things about how they should behave, or 116  they should be like if they want to be able to achieve their goals, but if you don’t do them, then there’s no credibility behind what you say.”  Another example of a role that college age men brought up during the focus groups was being a provider. Participant 1 from Focus Group 4 noted the importance of providing for his family: “I want to be someone that can support my family comfortably and be someone that they can rely on, I want to be reliable.”  Taking on the role of an advocate was mentioned several times when men were asked to envision themselves in the future as a man. Participant 1 from Focus Group 7 stated: “I feel like I’m overly passive in letting like some of these, some of the worst of these like stereotypical traits like manifest in the people around me and not being an advocate against it…and I’ve recently tried to be a little bit more of an advocate against it but I still think I have a long way to go on that front.” Participant 3 from Focus Group 5 echoed a hope to help fight against injustice: “I wanna be the kinda man that helps people if they’re in need of help and someone who gets rid of like, if I see any injustice.”  Men reported a desire to contribute to their community instead of just consuming. Participant 7 from Focus Group 4 said: “I mean like just contributing to the world and not being just simply not simply just consuming. To me I feel like I have to contribute a little bit to my community whether it be through the workplace or through my education. I feel like I need to be contributing to the world in general.”  A role that came up several times during the discussion in the focus groups was being a leader. For example, Participant 1 from Focus Group 4 reported: “I want to be myself as a leader right now, but I want to continue to be a leader as I grow with the experiences that I’m going 117  through.” Note that is also an example of an aspect of possible masculinities that men continued to envision for themselves in the future in relation to their environmental systems.   More than one man commented on their hope that in the future, they would be more willing to seek help from others. Participant 1 from Focus Group 7 shared: “I think part of being strong though is definitely being willing to seek help and realizing when you need help.”   A final example of a hoped-for role and pattern of behaviour that was brought forth in the focus group was being a gentleman. Participant 3 from Focus Group 8 described the importance to acting in a chivalrous manner: “I’m definitely, I’ve always been a fan of like the ideas of chivalry and being a gentleman and associating it with manhood.” 4.5 Summary of EPMM The EPMM was developed using qualitative methodology to create a theoretical model,  grounded in empirical data, to explain how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. The EPMM consists of three parts: (a) current masculinities, (b) factors impacting how college aged men envision their possible masculinities, and (c) a categorization for the envisioned possible masculinities. The EPMM does not expand on Part A of the model, however, Part A serves as a starting point when we begin to consider developing a model that examples future masculinities. Part B of EPMM includes the following as contributors to the envisioning process and the view of possible masculinities that results: individual factors, microsystem, mesosystem, exosytem, macrosystem, critical incident(s) and chronosystem. Through these experiences and factors, men decide if they will discard, continue, modify or add different aspects of masculinity to their own envisioned possible masculinities. In Part C of the EPMM, the model illustrates how examples of the envisioned possible masculinities can be classified as two types, those that exist within the internal or external domains.  118   Using Staussian language, the EPMM contains seven properties. In Part B: individual factors, microsystem factors, mesosystem factors, exosystem factors, macrosystem factors, critical incident(s) and chronosystem/movement within the model. The EPMM contains the following property in Part C: possible masculinities. Possible masculinities has two sub-properties: Each property in Part B and each sub-property in Part C had its own dimensions (described above).  The findings were evaluated according to Corbin and Strauss (2008)’s nine conditions to foster quality research, and ten criteria for judging quality research. See section 3.8 for a review of the conditions and criteria and how they were met during the research study. Two external audits were conducted on the methods and outcome of the present study and to ensure that GT methods were faithfully employed, and the resulting GT reasonably described the data (see Appendix M for more information about the external audits). Next, a discussion of how the EPMM can be a useful explanation for researchers and clinicians is offered. The strengths and weaknesses of the EPMM are then illustrated. Finally, areas of future research are discussed.   119  Chapter 5: Discussion   The aim of the present study was to further develop the existing, yet nascent concept of possible masculinities by creating a model, grounded in data, to explain how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. In doing so, this study could drive future empirical research and add to the literature on practical intervention efforts to guide counselling with college aged men based on this created data-driven model of envisioning possible masculinities. Given college aged men’s many negative life outcomes compared to women (e.g., dropping out of school more often, engaging more frequently in risky behaviours [Courtenay, 2000; Oliffe, Galdas, Han, & Kelly, 2013]), research is needed to address the health disparities of this high-risk group (Molenaar & Liang, 2020). In sum, this study addressed the need for a fuller exploration of men and their envisioning of possible masculinities, especially theoretically (Isacco, 2015).  Specifically, in building on the work by Davies et al. (2010) on possible masculinities, this study used grounded theory (GT) methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 2003) to create a data driven model that offers an explanation on how college age men envision their possible masculinities. The model, titled the Envisioning Possible Masculinities Model (EPMM), illustrates the factors proposed to impact how college aged men envision their possible masculinities; the process by which they maintain, alter, or add new visions of possible masculinities, and the components or types of possible masculinities. The model explicitly addresses the first part of the definition of possible masculinities first described by Davies et al. in 2010: what do men want to be in the future? The resulting transcripts of eight focus groups with 49 college aged men were analyzed to create the EPMM.  120  Literature on possible masculinities is scarce. It was first defined by Davies et al. (2010) and further elaborated on by Shen-Miller et al. (2013). The definition was developed based on the clinical experiences of the authors inspired by their clinical work with college aged men. When this thesis was proposed, the present study was the only study known to the author that explored possible masculinities empirically. Just very recently, Molenaar and Liang (2020) published a brief empirical inquiry of possible masculinities, which serves as the first empirical study examining possible masculinities. This thesis now serves as the second. Molenaar and Liang (2020) explored how college aged men conceptualize difference aspects of their personal manhood and if they can see the barriers between achieving these masculinities and their present selves. By distinguishing between “possible ideal masculinity” and “should ought masculinity,” (Molenaar & Liang, 2020, p. 321) they hoped their exploration would not limit participants to reporting hegemonic forms of possible masculinities in the future. While both studies (Molenaar & Liang, 2020 and the present study) are on the topic of possible masculinities and use empirical approaches, they remain distinct in the knowledge generated. The present study remains the first, to the author’s knowledge, research resulting in a model of possible masculinities, which can be used to contextualize and give greater meaning to past literature on the topic and aid in the development of hypotheses and research questions to advance future research.  5.1 The Emergence of a Core Category   Regardless of the selected approach of GT, the emergence of a core category is a necessary step in the development of a GT. Traditionally, and typically but not always so in contemporary applications of GT, the core category is unknown to the researcher in advance and becomes apparent from subsequent rounds of data collection and analysis. The present study makes a small departure from the traditional “completely unknown” core category emergence, in 121  that there was a very loose, general and broad idea of what the organizing and overarching category of the study was going to be: possible masculinities. However, this core construct was clarified, refined, and defined with its boundaries more distinctly demarcated during the process of this study than was the case at the outset of the study. Moreover, a specific element of possible masculinities emerged from the data that required further explanation, based on the narrative accounts of participants in the study. In other words, while the broad concept of possible masculinities was identified as the general subject of the resulting model, the final core category, envisioning possible masculinities, only emerged from the data following several rounds of data analyses. While the approach of “pre-defining” a core category may not be traditional, some scholars have suggested using GT as a way to more fully explore topics in the field in this manner (e.g., Isacco, 2015). In this study, using a cloudy idea of a core category proved quite helpful in understanding the nascent concept of possible masculinities. It is important to note that this approach is still in keeping with Strauss and Corbin’s (2003) use of literature as a way to build theoretical sensitivity. The initial use of literature also prevents the unintended duplication of knowledge that was previously identified, thus progressing the literature beyond what little is known about the specific topical area.  5.2 Triangulation with Extant Theories   While the Glasserian version of GT emphasizes that the researcher should refrain from engaging with pre-existing literature prior to completing her research, to prevent the researcher from viewing the data using preconceived ideas, the Straussian version, which is adopted for the current study, maintains the opposite view. Therefore, “in a grounded theory, extant field theories and literature should be used as both data for theory generation as well references for triangulating the validity of the grounded theory,” (Lo, 2014, p. 293). In other words, to create a 122  GT that is most meaningful (i.e., useful for the field), from the Straussian perspective, a researcher uses data in the form of data collection, as well as data in the form of extant literature. By including extant literature into the analysis, the resulting GT has an opportunity to creatively incorporate pre-existing bodies of work and critically examine the pre-existing literature against itself (Lo, 2014). The use of additional literature is not only important during initial analyses to develop a preliminary model but to elaborate and refine the developing model. Lo (2014) suggested that to enhance the validity of the resulting GT, a researcher should look “critically for (in)consistency, contradiction, and connection between the resulting GT and extant theories,” (Lo, 2014, p. 293).   To conduct theoretical triangulation (i.e., the use of more than one theoretical explanation in the interpretation of the phenomena [Denzin, 1978)]), the EPMM was compared to current theories of masculinities in the field. No empirical theories exist specifically on possible masculinities to directly compare this theory to. However, since the EPMM itself has an implicit component of time inherently within it (i.e., envisioning assumes a future time), masculinity theories (and research on current masculinities) were useful to contrast with, especially the ones that influenced or spoke indirectly to the concept of possible masculinities (e.g., Positive Psychology Positive Masculinities; Kiselica et al., 2016). In addition, comparison and contrast with the three previous papers on possible masculinities (Davies et al., 2010; Shen-Miller et al., 2015; Molenaar & Liang, 2020) also helped refine and enhance the developed EPMM.  When Davies et al. (2010) first defined possible masculinities, they stated that, “possible masculinity includes those attitudes, characteristics, behaviours, skills, and coping strategies that are required for men to lead positive, healthy lives” (Davies et al., 2010, p. 348). Because the participants in this study experienced and discussed possible masculinities in a manner beyond 123  these definitional components, the EPMM model expands and refines this list by adding an internal domain of possible masculinities, which includes beliefs, values, and attitudes. Beliefs, values and attitudes are often grouped together in the field as these terms are not mutually exclusive and often are associated together (Emmanuel & Delaney, 2014). In addition, the external domain in the EPMM includes behaviours and roles, while only behaviours were explicitly part of Davies et al.’s (2010) definition. In the EPMM, coping strategies and skills are subsumed under the construct of behaviours. Characteristics was taken out of the EPMM as they seemed to be a secondary phenomenon which were influenced by and perhaps created as result of beliefs, values, and attitudes, and could be put in either the external or internal domain. In this way, the resulting EPMM has expanded the definition of possible masculinities, while still accounting for all of the major original concepts associated with it (i.e., Davies et al.’s [2010] original definition).  In connecting the EPMM model to the larger body of literature on masculinities, the internal and external domains of the EPMM encapsulate concepts that already exist in the masculinity literature. One example is roles. Roles are central to some of the biggest theories on masculinities in the field including Gender Role Strain Paradigm (GRSP) and Gender Role Conflict (GRC) Theory. Thus, the EPMM model compliments most bodies of literature within the field of masculinities. For example, if one is coming from a GRC framework, they can work with college aged men to identify their hoped-for future roles. Alternatively, if one is working from a male values perspective, they can ask men to envision their future values.  The concepts within GRSP (e.g., discrepancy strain, dysfunctional strain, trauma strain) and GRC Theory (e.g., GRC pattern of restricted emotionality) can also be used within the EPMM, as they can be variables impacting how a man envisions his future masculinities. For 124  example, if a man is experiencing dysfunctional strain (i.e., occurs after men exemplify the traditionally desirable masculine norms but experience the negative side effects associated with it), it may be beneficial to look at how system levels (i.e., individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, Part B of EPMM) are impacted, and how it influences the man’s envisioning of his possible masculinities.  The first part of the model, “Current Masculinities,” (i.e., “Part A”) can be a place holder for much of the current research on masculinity and many pre-existing models and theories of general masculinity. An extensive amount of theorizing and research has already gone into identifying, measuring and exploring current masculinities, and thus this part of the EPMM was not further elaborated on, because there appeared to be very little need. In sum, the EPMM itself has theoretical integration built into it, by having Part A. Therefore, the EPMM is a versatile model that can be integrated into various theories and models, and also holds relevance for clinical practice or research, regardless of theoretical background or model of masculinity drawn upon. The EPMM incorporates Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Theory (2005) into its Part B, where the contextual factors that can influence possible masculinities are illustrated. This is not the first time that Bronfenbrenner’s theory has been discussed in relation to possible masculinities. Shen-Miller et al. (2013) used Bronfenbrenner’s theory to organize college aged men’s health behaviours. Shen-Miller et al. (2013) further employed Bronfenbrenner’s theory and possible masculinities to deepen their discussion of their Men’s Centre Approach (MCA). Shen-Miller et al. (2013) integrated the Bio-Ecological Theory with the MCA to guide counsellors in their endeavors to create and implement systemic and culturally sensitive interventions with college aged men (see Chapter 2: Literature Review).   125  Men in the present study spoke about what they were looking for in terms of help to reach their possible masculinities, and many of these needs were similar to the tenets of the MCA, providing greater trustworthiness for the EPMM. For example, one participant suggested not even naming a clinic that focuses on providing male sensitive interventions a “counselling center.” This is one example supporting the use of the name MCA alone, as a way to de-stigmatize counselling services and reduce the shame associated with accessing mental health services for men. This example provides evidence for MCA’s tenet of “acceptance, nonjudgment, unconditional positive regard” (Davies et al. 2010; Shen-Miller et al., 2013). Support for the MCA’s tenet of “commitment to social justice and activism,” (Davies et al. 2010; Shen-Miller et al., 2013) was also evident in some of the possible masculinities that men spoke about in the present study. Men spoke about wanting to be an advocate in their community in the future. In other words, the tenet of infusing social justice and activism into therapy is consistent with goals that some college aged men already endorse. Therefore, Davies et al. (2010)’s clinical experiences leading to the development of the MCA matches some of the research finding in this study.  While the MCA offers an interpersonal and skills-based approach on how clinicians can work with college aged men, it is devoid of guiding theory. Having a theory is important because a theory can both explain why a phenomenon occurs (based on observations) and predict what should happen next. Thus, a theory provides clinicians with a foundation for treatment planning (e.g., identifying treatment goals). The EPMM offers what the clinicians can target or discuss during interventions. In other words, the EPMM outlines the “what”, and the MCA outlines the “how”. For example, therapists can enhance commitment to social justice and activism (tenets of MCA) by exploring values and beliefs (internal domain of EPMM, Part C) and examining their 126  macrosystem (contextual factors contributing to possible masculinities of EPMM, Part B) to brainstorm places they can volunteer. The EPMM is therefore a helpful tool to use in tandem with the MCA.   Kiselica and colleagues (2016) put forth a model of current masculinity that focuses on male strengths. Their model, known as the Positive Psychology Positive Masculinity (PPPM) model, “presents general notions or themes of positive masculinity,” (Kiselica et al., 2016, p.126). Some of the general themes that Kiselica et al. (2016) present in their PPPM are examples of possible masculinities that the participants in our study spoke about. Some themes that were described by Kiselica et al. (2016) that were evident in the present study include: male ways of caring, generative fatherhood, male self-reliance, worker-provider tradition of men, men’s respect for women and male forms of service. For example, in support for Kiselica et al. (2016)’s concept of generative fatherhood, college aged men in this study identified a role that they wanted to exemplify in the future (i.e., a possible masculinity): being a father, especially one who is responsive to their children’s needs. Men in the present study spoke about their hope that in the future, they will advocate against the violence against women, thus providing support for PPPM’s theme of men’s respect for women. Finally, men in the present study reported a desire to take care of their community in the future thus validating PPPM’s theme of male forms of service.  As previously mentioned, Molenaar and Liang (2020) very recently explored how men understand their various personal manhoods if they perceive barriers between those manhoods and their present selves. They found that men may understand their masculinity in unique ways based on how masculinity is framed. In their study, they framed possible masculinities as either “ideal” or “should ought” (Molenaar & Liang, 2020, p. 321) In other words, they either asked 127  participants: “ideally, what kind of man would you like to become?” or “what kind of man should you be?” (Molenaar & Liang, 2020, p. 321) Nevertheless, while the EPMM does not separate possible masculinities as “ideal” or “should ought,” it does provide more insight to the components of these possibilities. In other words, the “ideal” or “should ought” masculinities identified in Molenaar and Liang (2020)’s study could still be further abstracted to their corresponding beliefs, values and attitudes (internal domain) and behaviours and roles (external domain). These components could help further understand “ideal” and “should ought” possible masculinities, an avenue of future research identified by Molenaar and Liang (2020).  In early drafts of the EPMM, barriers were a potential category that was considered. A few participants discussed some barriers (or envisioned barriers) to becoming the man they hoped to be in the future. The concept of barriers itself was not added to the theory for several reasons. The present GT’s intended purpose was to explore the concept of possible masculinities and further refine its definition using empirical data. Thus, more energy went into the refinement and development of the actual concept of possible masculinities, leading to the eventual expulsion of the category of barriers. As the core concept of envisioned possible masculinities became the focus on the study through immersion in the data and conducting analysis, barriers were deemed secondary and not needed to understand how men envision possible masculinities and more relevant to a model of how men actually change their masculinity (and potentially enact an envisioned possible masculinity), which was not the purpose of the model being developed.  Nevertheless, some barriers that emerged from the data included those that were identified by Molenaar and Liang (2020) in their study. Some of these barriers include fear and doubt, lack of motivation and laziness, and inadequate social support. It is exciting news that the field has already begun to explore a limitation of this present study.  128  Davies et al. (2010) acknowledge the contribution of Markus and Nurius’ (1986) concept of possible selves in the development of their definition of possible masculinities. Possible selves were introduced to add to the literature on the psychology of self, specifically self-knowledge about how an individual thinks about their potential and about their future (Markus & Nurius, 1986). Possible selves “represent individuals’ ideas of what they might become, what they would like to become and what they are afraid of becoming,” (Markus & Nurius, 1986, p. 954). In 2010, Davies et al. defined possible masculinities as “aspirational and future oriented goals for  men’s identity and behaviours based on (a) what men want to be in the future, (b) what men require to meet their developmental needs, and (c) what we, as a community, need from men to foster community safety and health,” (Davies et al. 2010, p. 348). Based on Davies et al.’s (2010) definition of possible masculinities, it is clear that these researchers contained their definition of possible masculinities as “aspirational” and left out masculinities that college aged men are afraid of becoming. While Davies et al. (2010) only specifically points out that the definition of possible masculinities borrows Markus and Nurius’s (1986) idea of “what one hopes to be in the future,” (Davies et al., 2010, p. 349), the present investigation on possible masculinities found several other links to the concept of possible selves, more specifically, the existence of possible masculinities that were not only aspirational, but also feared. This finding expands the definition of the concept of possible masculinities and adds to the contextualization of the EPMM model within the field of masculinities and the psychology of self.  More than “what one hopes to be in the future,” emerged as a similarity between the constructs of possible masculinities and possible selves. Markus and Nurius (1984) stated that possible selves are “the ideal selves that we would very much like to become. They are also the selves we could become, and the selves we are afraid of becoming,” (Markus & Nurius, 1986, p. 129  954). Davies et al.’s (2010) definition of possible masculinities is similar to Markus & Nurius’ (1986) definition in that it describes the selves (i.e., masculinities) that college aged men would like to become in the future but is dissimilar to Markus & Nurius’ (1986) definition of the selves (i.e., masculinities) in that it does not include what college aged men are afraid of becoming in the future. In other words, Davies et al.’s (2010) definition of possible masculinities is conceptualized as only positive and aspirational. However, in the present study, when men were asked to describe the kind of man they wanted to be in the future, their descriptions consisted not only of “hoped for selves” (e.g., I want to be successful), but also included “feared selves” (e.g., I don’t want to be a burden to others). In other words, college aged men described their possible masculinities outside of “positive” and “aspirational” ones. The present study did not find evidence that possible masculinities are only aspirational. To reflect this finding, in the EPMM, there is no distinction between positive (hoped for) or negative (feared) masculinities. The present study’s conceptualization of possible masculinities goes beyond Davies et al.’s (2010) work and is better connected to Markus and Nurius’ (1986) original definition of possible selves because it includes the negative and feared possible selves (i.e., masculinities) in addition to the positive and aspirational possible selves (i.e., masculinities). By utilizing a part of possible selves, that was originally missed by Davies et al. (2010), the construct of possible masculinities is made broader and perhaps more useful. By including the negative and feared valence of possible masculinities, there is more leniency on ways to work with college aged men to approach or avoid their envisioned possible masculinities because clinicians would now have more information from men. In other words, now clinicians would not only have information about what a college aged man wants to be in the future, but also what he fears on becoming in the future. Suggestions for working with college aged men using this broader conceptualization 130  of possible masculinities is briefly offered next to illustrate the helpfulness of using this broader conceptualization (note that section 5.3 below contains a more comprehensive discussion of implications of the present research).    First, feared or “negative” possible masculinities can be identified (using the EPMM), and if they are described as “feared,” validation can be offered by the clinician to meet the client where they are (i.e., show attunement to the client’s needs) and build the therapeutic alliance. Second, by identifying feared or negative possible masculinities, other cognitive therapies can be used to modify or challenge underlying thinking patterns that can eventually lead to more realistic or positive thoughts and eventually to the increase of healthy behaviours. Markus and Nurius (1986) suggest that an individual can challenge negative possible selves by recruiting conceptions of past successes and future positive possibilities” (p. 963). (See section 5.3 below for more implications.) By adding the negative spectrum of possible masculinities, it may risk critics to housing the EPMM into the “deficient models” of masculinity theories (see Chapter 2), but it is argued that adding this dimension actually is better able to foster positive masculinities. By expanding the construct of possible masculinities to include both aspirational and feared possibilities, EPMM offers a more accurate description of the pool of possible masculinities that was previously offered by Davies et al. (2010) and better embeds the construct of possible masculinities within the larger psychology of self literature in general, and particularly to the construct of possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986). Possible masculinities are the various “masculine” selves, and therefore, the broader literature on the psychology of the self is a relevant body of literature to be embedded within.  Since the original concept of possible masculinities used inspiration from possible selves in its development, exploring Markus & Nurius’ (1986) discussion for the antecedents of 131  possible selves is warranted. In their discussion on antecedents, support for Part B of the EPMM was found. For instance, possible selves are the result of an individual’s own thoughts, feelings, characteristics, and behaviours, especially those that result from social comparisons (Markus & Nurius (1986). Further, possible selves are derived by “an individual’s particular sociocultural and historical context,” including the media and immediate social experiences (Markus & Nurius, 1986), p. 954). EPMM builds on Markus and Nurius’ (1986) discussion on the antecedents of possible selves, by more concretely organizing these antecedents of possible selves/possible masculinities by borrowing the systems identified in Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Theory. These antecedents were clearly identified in the present study’s focus group data and is described in its eventual GT (i.e., EPMM). Two studies completed with college aged men that used GT methodology to investigate men’s identity development are relevant to review against the present study’s findings. Edwards and Jones (2009) developed a theory grounded in data with ten college aged men that “depicts their gender identity as developed through constant interaction with society’s expectations of them as men” (p. 210). The theory modeled the process of how college aged men preform masculinity according to external expectations. The model uses the metaphor of putting on a mask to describe the process of how men preform their masculinity. Edward and Jones (2009) describe three phases that men progress through: (1) feeling a need to put on a mask, (2) wearing a mask, and (3) experiencing and recognizing consequences of wearing a mask. At the end of the process, the authors reported that the men in their study began to transcend external expectations when they experienced “critical influences” and “critical incidents” (Edwards & Jones, 2009, p. 215). Critical influences were described as “personal influences, historical or literary influences, exposure to alternative versions of masculinity, academic courses and critical events in their 132  lives” (Edwards & James, 2009, p. 220). Critical incidents/events were defined as “specific events that significantly influenced them as men” (Edwards & James, 2009, p. 220).   Edward and James (2009) description of critical influences are similar to the way the EPMM defines the “chronosystem.” Edward and James (2009) description of critical incidents/events is similar to the way EPMM defines “critical incident(s).” Among these similarities is the notable difference that Edwards and James’ (2009) theory is modelling current identity development, while the EPMM focuses on how the chronosystem and critical incident(s), (amongst other systems, see Chapter 4), impact how men envision their future identities as men (i.e., possible masculinities). By adding and modelling the future orientation, the EPMM adds to our understanding of how men envision themselves in the future, amongst studies like Edward and James’ (2009) and Harris’ (2010) (which is described next) that focus on current masculinities.   In 2010, Harris published a model representing the meanings college aged men make about masculinities and their contextual influences. Harris (2010) used GT methodology with 68 undergraduate men to develop his model. Harris (2010) described three variables within his model: “(a) meaning of masculinities, which reflected the participants’ gender-related attitudes, beliefs, and assumptions, (b) contextual influences that shaped, reinforced, and challenged these participants’ meanings, and (c) male gendered norms that represent the outcomes of the interactions between the aforementioned variables of the model” (p. 305). Harris’ (2010) second variable is described similarly to how EPMM defines how men either discard, modify, continue or add possible masculinities, except that the EPMM models future masculinities, while Harris (2010) focuses on current meaning men make about their masculinities. Both Harris (2010) and Edward and Jones (2009) studies acknowledge the impact of the individual and his interaction 133  with his environment in understanding his current masculinities. The EPMM builds on these studies by describing how a man and his interactions with his environment, shapes the kind of man he wants to be in the future. By incorporating the future aspect, this study expands researchers’ and clinicians’ understanding on how college aged men think about their futures and can aid in the development of interventions to help them realize or avoid these visions and lead healthy lives.  As exemplified above, theoretical integration is as an essential step to enhance a GT’s usefulness in the field. A final purpose of theoretical integration with extant literature is to honor the past research and researchers who developed the concepts. It is on their shoulders that new researchers stand on to innovate. As outlined above, the current study built upon and contributes back to extant research and theorizing. 5.3 Implications   As a theoretical model that was “discovered” through the analysis of empirical data, the EPMM offers several types of implications, including theoretical, research and clinical. Theoretical and research wise, this is the first known study that used GT methodology in relation to investigating possible masculinities. It has further developed a concept that was created based on the clinical judgments and experiences of practitioners working in the field with college aged men. By using GT methodology, more empirical evidence is available to support the new and emerging concept of possible masculinities. It is one of the first empirical studies on the construct of “possible masculinities,” following only Molenaar and Liang’s (2020) study on possible masculinities and barriers (previously, the construct was primarily advanced through clinical experience, anecdotal evidence, and non-data driven theorizing). The EPMM helps add to the research field of men and masculinities, which has sometimes been described as immature 134  and in need of theoretical development (Issaco, 2015). The EPMM also adds to the literature specifically focusing on understanding men from a positive lens, which is in contrast to the vast majority of the field, which works from a deficit model, implicitly or explicitly (Kiselica et al., 2016).  By further developing the definition of possible masculinities, as done through this study, there is more information available to potentially create measurement tools to help assess possible masculinities and determine whether clinical interventions based on possible masculinities (e.g., Men’s Centre Approach) are effective. Because possible masculinities are closely associated with mental health interventions (Davies et al., 2010), an assessment tool could be very helpful in initial intake contexts, particularly one that is not premised exclusively on a deficit model of masculinity. For example, the eventual creation of an assessment protocol or set of questions based on the EPMM can help identify key areas of developmental struggle for men and can assist in connecting them with appropriate services or interventions. Indeed in 2013, Shen-Miller et al. reported that there is a possible masculinities tool currently in development that can help assess if their approach (i.e., Men’s Centre Approach) is an effective approach to helping college age men with their mental and physical health concerns. The EPMM model can fruitfully contribute to the creation of their measurement tool or a subsequent one as it further describes and reorganizes the elements of possible masculinities into internal and external domains. Measuring or creating a form or an inventory of contextual factors may also be helpful in clinical and research settings. One thing that could be helpful clinically is the development of a tool that assesses the ratio of healthy possible masculinities to that of toxic possible masculinities across the two domains and five variables in part C of the EPMM. In balancing a deficit and positive psychology view of masculinity, this tool will recognize that, while men 135  envision largely positive future masculinities, they continue to engage in harmful behaviours that are characteristic of non-positive masculinities. This combined with another tool that identifies barriers or perceived barriers can be used to work clinically with men to problem solve. These proposed tools can also be based on assessment measures such as the Possible Selves Questionnaire (Oyserman & Markus, 1990). These tools will help make more direct, or clearer, to men the changes they need to make, in line with the clinical approach that has been offered by Davies et al. (2010).   Further, the resulting GT will provide insight into possible masculinities and can therefore aid in the development of clinical interventions. Davies et al. (2010) provide examples of clinical interventions that have already been developed using the concept of possible masculinities, but their list appears somewhat haphazard without a clearly specified, underlying organizing framework. The resulting GT from this study could be used to categorize and strengthen these existing interventions or be inspiration to develop additional, empirically valid, novel possible masculinity interventions, that are based within a theoretical framework.   In addition, discussing the model itself can be part of a clinical intervention promoting the development of adaptive possible masculinities in college aged men. The model as psychoeducation to counselling clients can illuminate the factors contributing to how the men are or could be envisioning their future selves as men; perhaps helping them develop more agency or insight to guide their future behaviours. A clinician could also decide to create a handout for in-session use that will allow the client to map actual examples onto a blank template of the model as a means for improving self-clarity and increasing insight. In addition, the model could also serve useful in case conceptualizations for clinicians working with college aged men. It could further be used as a teaching tool in counselling and psychotherapy training courses or general 136  courses on the psychology of men and masculinity (e.g., University of Toronto’s course titled “Men and Masculinities,”) or within newly developing “Masculinity Studies” graduate programs at Stoney Brook University and the University of Calgary, to promote deeper understanding of masculinity and how it could be changed over time (or at least envisioned to be changed over time).  Combining the EPMM with the elements of the MCA should increase the effectiveness of clinical work with college aged men as the former provides theoretical guidance and the latter provides congruent clinical intervention guidance. In this way, men can clearly see what has been impacting their behaviour and resultant interventions for change are readily available. While the model itself does not have barriers within it officially, it is recommended to ask college aged men to identify these barriers and develop problem solving skills to overcome these barriers.    Some of the possible masculinities that were identified included increased skillful behaviours. Several men in the group endorsed a desire to develop more effective emotional regulation skills (e.g., anger, anxiety), interpersonal skills, distress tolerance skills and mindfulness skills. Targeting these skill sets in clinical work, using the MCA approach in tandem, appears a particularly worthwhile avenue to enhance men’s physical and mental health outcomes.    As envisioning is inherently a cognitive process (i.e., a mental action), cognitive therapies are recommended to foster positive possible masculinities, while challenging negative possible masculinities. As previously mentioned, once the EPMM is used to identify possible masculinities with the client, cognitive re-modification could be used to challenge thinking patterns underlying “feared” or negative possible masculinities in the client or to foster thoughts underlying positive possible masculinities. Markus and Nurius (1986) suggest that individuals 137  run mental simulations by constructing scenarios to assist with decision making about the future. In other words, mental simulations, or visualization, can be used with clients in a therapeutic environment to help men identify ways they can avoid or approach certain masculinities. During visualization, clinicians can help men identify the steps needed to approach positive possible masculinities, as well as identify barriers and ways to overcome these barriers on a man’s journey of approaching or avoiding his possible masculinities.  Finally, the contextual factors that are identified in the model can help brainstorm ways that college aged men can contribute to their community, a goal that was originally part of the definition of possible masculinities that was put forth by Davies et al. (2010). By looking at these factors, college aged men are more able to see what ways they can contribute to the community and what levels of community they are already been contributing to. For example, some men in the study reported that they have been actively trying to mitigate their history of male privilege, and this could serve as guidance for how college aged men seeking to contribute to their community could do so.  5.4 Limitations  Every study has limitations and this study is no exception. However, the major limitations of this study were in awareness during the design phase, so effort was taken to minimize or account for such limitations. In the following section, limitations of the present GT study are acknowledged, how these limitations may impact the findings are discussed, and suggestions to overcome limitations where possible are illustrated. Two main categories of limitations that will be discussed include those arising from the methodology, and those arising from the researcher/actual research procedures employed. Because the qualitative researcher is to be intimately involved with the study and is known as the “primary instrument” of data 138  collection and analysis (i.e., methodology), separating methodological limitations with those arising from the researcher is difficult (McCollough, 2016) but will be attempted here, to some extent. Thus, both types of limitations will be discussed in tandem.  The first limitation of the current study is that the primary investigator of the present GT was not involved with the initial data collection and that data collection was completed when the researcher joined the investigation. As previously noted, the qualitative researcher is the “primary instrument” of data collection and analysis, and it is through her interactions with the data that categories are created, the core concept is identified, and theoretical sampling occurs. In the perfect, best-case scenario, a GT is created through a fully iterative process, meaning that, after collecting the data, the researcher engages with it (i.e., reads it, codes it, makes connections within data), and then goes back out into the field to collect more data (i.e., theoretical sampling) to add to her developing GT/explanation. Instead, in the present study, the data for the eight focus groups were all collected before being analyzed by the researcher. Receiving previously collected focus group data yields several issues. One issue is the ethics associated with using data that was collected for another purpose. In other words, the participants who consented to participating in the intended study, were not able to consent if their data could be re-purposed towards another study. While the intended purpose of the present study is distinct from the original purpose, originally collected as part of a program evaluation to learn more about male-identified students’ health and behaviours, it is similar in the purpose of building a theory or model to understand college aged men using qualitative methodology, specifically GT. A question of confidentiality comes up when using data that was originally collected for another purpose. No breaches in confidentially occurred as the data given to the present researcher was de-identified. In other words, there was no 139  foreseeable way to connect the participants to their data, since the audio files used no names, and they were already transcribed (see transcription guide used in Appendix G). All demographic information was also de-identified. The present study received approval from University of British Columbia’s Behavioural Research Ethics Board to use the pre-collected focus group transcripts by demonstrating no ethical violations were made. While confidentiality was not breached, the use of previously collected data for a program evaluation and repurposing it for research purposes was not ideal.  Another issue that relates to using data collected externally to the researcher is that it reduces how close the researcher is initially connected to the data. This intimacy provides the researcher with perhaps an improved ability to understand the data deeply and engage in the theoretical sampling process (or at least make doing so less cognitively taxing). As part of prototypical GT methodology, researchers are able to create their own interview questions, or sample theoretically based on this close connection with the data. Collecting one’s own data also allows the researcher to directly determine when they are ready to conclude data collection and theoretical saturation has been sufficiently reached rather than proceed on faith that it has. The present researcher was not involved with data collection and therefore the quality of the resulting GT, given the importance of the researcher being involved with data collection, may have been affected because the researcher was not available to ask questions that she may have wanted to ask given her engagement with the data collection. To mitigate any decreases to the quality of the resulting GT, the present researcher did the following to maximize the immersion of herself into the data.  The researcher repeatedly read the transcripts and listened to the audio files of the original focus groups (at least eight to ten times for transcripts, and twice for audio).  140  While the data was not collected by the primary researcher, research supervision was provided by the researcher involved with the original research. In other words, Dr. Robinder Bedi, the supervisor for this thesis, assisted in the collection of the focus group data. This allowed the opportunities for consultation with an individual who was originally involved with the data collection. Through these consultations, the primary researcher gained insight on the rationale of some methodological choices (e.g., interview questions), increasing the chance that a grounded model could be developed.  Even though the researcher was able to gain some insight about the rationale behind the questions asked during the focus groups, she still was not able to choose the actual questions or the wording of the questions. However, the original interview schedule specifically asked about possible masculinities and what kind of man the participants wanted to be in the future. In this way, the questions asked and elaborated on during the focus groups were similar to those that would have been asked by the present researcher anyway. Therefore, the questions asked, and the data collected could serve as sufficient data to create the intended model for the present study. The data collected and re-purposed for this study even reached theoretical saturation. In other words, no new codes or categories emerged from the data approximately around the time of analyzing the sixth transcript. Reaching theoretical saturation enhances the quality and rigor of the present study. In the event that more data needed to be collected, the researcher was prepared to conduct focus groups for theoretical sampling purposes (see Chapter 3). It was determined that theoretical saturation was met in Phase I (see section 3.6.2.1.1 for a fuller explanation on how theoretical saturation was met).  As the data was previously collected, several years earlier with no permission to recontact the participants, combined with the de-identification of the data, the present researcher was 141  unable to check the accuracy of the data collected. In other words, the researcher was unable to take the resulting model back to members of the focus group to ensure that the researcher did not widely misconstrue the data (i.e., member checking). Doing so can ensure that the researcher captured the true essence of what the participants were trying to communicate during the study. To account for this, two external audits occurred. As part of these audits, two researchers that were not involved in the research examined the process and outcome of the present study to evaluate whether the findings, interpretations and conclusions were supported by the data and readily connected to what the participants said, as judged by an outsider observer. These external audits were completed by (a) a female senior graduate student in counselling psychology and, (b) a male research assistant working in the research lab that the present researcher works in, and indicated that the resulting model (i.e., EPPM) was highly supported by the raw data (see Appendix M for the external audits and how feedback from the audits was incorporated into the current study).   As previously stated, the focus group data was collected several years earlier. The focus groups were conducted from 2013 to 2014 (only one focus group was collected in 2013, the rest were collected in 2014). With the data being around six years old, it can be criticized that it no longer captures college aged men’s experiences. In the time that the data was collected, the #metoo movement has gained steam around the world (PettyJohn, Muzzey, Maas, & McCauley, 2019), and thus there is potential that some information was not considered by the resulting GT. Because of this limitation, the reader is cautioned to interpret the results accordingly. Because gender norms typically take decades to modify and mature (Haines, Deaux, & Lofaro, 2016), it is likely that the overall findings, and the resulting EPMM will not be impacted significantly. 142  Instead, the specific examples offered may be different if the study used more recently collected focus group data.  Another data related limitation is that all of the data was collected from the same site: Western Washington University. While researchers can do their best to sample multiple sites to make their data as diverse as possible and applicable to many populations, there are pragmatic limitations to that endeavor. While all data need not be collected from the same site, it is general practice in research that all the data for the study is collected at one time and at one location, due to limited resources (i.e., time, funding). The data that was collected was a largely but not entirely white, cisgender, and heterosexual sample, making it already likely limited in its applicability to diverse populations. While this is the case, the distribution of the data (in terms of ethnicity, sexual orientation etc.) was similar to the distribution of Western Washington University (see Chapter 3). Thus, the sample collected is representative of the locale and we can more confidently generalize the result to similarly sized and populated cities, particularly those in the Pacific Northwest, and especially those in the United States. Additionally, a GT typically produces a mid-range theory (i.e., a theory that describes a phenomenon in relation to a particular context and can be useful in certain contexts but cannot be generalized to all situations) (Mathison, 2016), and therefore this study readily fits that purpose. Therefore, the range of this theory is college aged men between the age of 18 to 23 years old and living in the pacific northwest, specifically Washington State.  While there were no demographics data collected on what field of study the participants were completing their education in, because course credit was offered for psychology courses in Phase I, there may have been an over-representation of students coming from a psychology discipline. One participant in the study commented on how he was viewed differentially by his 143  peers when he mentions his academic major (liberal arts) compared to someone who is completing their major in chemistry (for the full example, see section 4.3.2.3 Mesosystem Factors). There is evidence that a gender divide exists in the choice of academic major (Turner & Bowen, 1999) limiting generalizability of the present results. In the future, collecting information about academic major may offer increased insights on the experience of college aged men and how their possible masculinities are impacted. While including more diverse participants, in terms of academic major, new examples could be highlighted, but because of the abstracted nature of the EPMM, these examples could still fit within Part B or Part C of the EPMM. For example, if more chemistry majors were included, their process of envisioning possible masculinities would still be impacted at the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem levels (Part B of EPMM), and their corresponding envisioned possible masculinities could still be categorized within an internal and external domain (Part C of EPMM). For further discussion on future considerations, see section 5.5. There is an additional limitation of using data that was collected in another country, only for it to be analyzed in a different country by an individual who has never lived where the data was collected. The data was collected in the United States of America and the researcher was born and resides in Canada. This could lead to potentially missing information or cultural aspects of the data. However, Dr. Bedi, the principal investigator of the study, was a professor and resident of Washington State and oversaw the research study and its write up. Further, the present researcher has visited Washington State and the city of Bellingham numerous times and has some first-hand and direct familiarly (albeit a non-resident one) with the local culture. Additionally, there many similarities between Western Washington University in Bellingham, Oregon, United States (where the data was collected) and the University of British Columbia in 144  Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (where the data was analyzed). The two cities are situated in the Pacific Northwest of North America and are approximately 90 kilometers apart. This proximity lends itself to similar climates, as well as potentially having similar student demographics. Dr. Grabb, an eminent scholar in sociology at UBC, who examines the differences between Canada and the United States, reported that there is little evidence to suggest that stereotypical differences between the two countries exist (Waugh, 2010). He reports rather, they are more similar in their attitudes towards health care, politics and individuality (Waugh, 2010). A survey of Canadians about western identity reported that 54% of British Columbians find themselves having more in common with individuals in Washington State than individuals living in Alberta (Angus Reid Institute, 2019). Dheer, Lenartowicz, Peterson, and Petrescu (2014) identify Washington State and British Columbia as part of an international and subcultural region which they call “Pacific” (p. 358). Further, the Cascadia Movement, is a movement that hopes to amalgamate the Canadian province of British Columbia, and the American states of Washington State and Oregon State, given their similarities in geography, environment, culture and economy (see cascadianow.org for more information). These examples provide evidence to support that the populations are similar in attitudes and thus supports their generalizability to each other and the likelihood that the location of analysis may be non-significant.  To keep the scope of the project at the level of a master’s thesis, the present researcher made some choices that methodologically limited the project. One of these choices was to not pursue a model that took into consideration the literature about a growth mind-set. During analysis and discussion with committee members, the idea that a growth mind-set could be a contributing factor to college aged men’s envisioning of possible masculinities came up.  While 145  a growth-mindset can be helpful to consider, especially in a study that is looking at future possible selves, the decision to not specifically look at this element was a choice that was made due to the limited time a master’s student has to complete her research in a timely fashion.  Considering a growth-mindset is a recommended avenue for future research when considering possible masculinities. A fuller discussion of future considerations is offered next.  5.5 Future Considerations  To foster and judge the quality of research, Corbin and Strauss (2008) provide nine conditions and ten criteria as outlined earlier in Chapter 3. Despite the existence of these guidelines by the creators of the Straussian approach to GT, it has been argued that this is not enough to fully assess the validity of the resulting GT. Subsequent validation evidence (i.e., evidence collected after the formulation of the GT), in addition to concurrent validation evidence (i.e., evidence collected during the formulation of the GT), has been strongly suggested by Lo (2014) in his Realist Grounded Theory (RGT) validation model.  Lo (2014) offers a RGT validation model as a way to determine the degree of validity of a GT. While the RGT validation model was originally developed with a realist ontology in mind, some of the criteria described are generic and can be applied to other brands of GT (such as a pragmatic GT, which is being done in this study). By modifying and applying the RGT validation model, it can be used to assess the validity of the EPMM. Lo (2014) describes that the degree of validity as conditional on the “closeness between a theoretical account and social reality,” (Lo, 2014, p. 61). In other words, validity depends on how closely the GT describes, models, or explains reality. In the RGT validation model, validity is suggested by (a) concurrent procedural validity, and (b) incremental procedural validity. (Lo, 2014). The present study is limited in that it did not collect concurrent procedural validity evidence during the study. 146  However, there is still the opportunity to collect subsequent validation evidence to illustrate incremental procedural validity.  The subsequent validation evidence, or the validation evidence that is collected after the GT is formulated, addresses the efficacy of the resulting GT. To collect subsequent validation evidence, future research can conduct “external testing studies and/or practices” (Lo, 2014, p. 1). For example, validation evidence can be collected as part of an external testing study, such as by administering a survey using a questionnaire that is based on the EPMM. Information gathered from survey research (i.e., quantitative data) not only aids in the validation of a study (e.g., if the resulting data is in line with the EPMM), but can be useful to test hypotheses and predict, for example, which specific factors are more likely to yield certain possible masculinities. Additionally, to develop validation evidence for the EPMM using a testing practice, future researchers could adopt the EPMM in their clinical practice (see section 5.3 Implications) with college aged men. In doing this, one can determine whether men’s experiences are compatible with the EPMM. Validation evidence, collected through validation procedures either occurring concurrently or following the development of the GT, are important in determining whether the GT is useful in the field. By adapting Lo’s (2014) RGT validation model, future research can address the EPMM’s usability in the field.  A natural next step to exploring a concept qualitatively is to begin to look at it quantitatively. Quantitative research is a helpful paradigm for quantifying data and generalizing it to a larger population, whereas GT is a mid-range theory (i.e., a theory that describes a phenomenon in relation to a particular context and can be useful in certain contexts but cannot be generalized to all situations; Mathison, 2016). For this study, a next stage of research could be to take emerging concepts from the resulting GT and test them quantitatively and attempt to 147  generalize them to a larger population. Now that there exists a model that illustrates the contextual factors that impact how men envision their possible masculinities, some more targeted hypotheses can be made that can be explored using quantitative approaches, such as regression analysis or analysis of variance to predict possible masculinities. Some specific hypotheses that are generated from the EPMM that can be investigated in future research (qualitative or quantitative) to support, refute, revise or expand the model include: 1. Masculinity is mutable (it changes or can change over time and through interaction with the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem factors.)  2. There will be individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem influences on how a man envisions the man he wants to be in the future (i.e., possible masculinities). 3. The influences of the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem will often be gradual and cumulative. 4. There are past experiences that have had a particularly strong, memorable or impactful influence on a man (i.e., critical incidents) related to his masculinities that more strongly and pervasively (and often immediately) leads to a change in a man’s perceptions of the man he wants to be in the future (i.e., possible masculinities).  5. The individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem comprehensively characterize all influences on a man’s possible masculinities (i.e., all influences can be categorized into one of these five systems: individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem). 148  6. Men’s visions of the man they want to be in the future are sometimes discarded completely (and these discarded visions are influenced by the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem). 7. Men’s visions of the man they want to be in the future are sometimes modified (and these modified visions are influenced by the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem). 8. Men’s visions of the man they want to be in the future are sometimes continued (and these continued visions are influenced by the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem). 9. Men sometimes adopt new visions of the man they want to be in the future (and these new visions are influenced by the individual, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem). 10. The components of possible masculinities can be readily categorized into two domains: internal (beliefs, values, attitudes) and external (behaviours, roles). The EPMM model describes how college aged men envision their possible masculinities. A prospective longitudinal design could be employed to test which possible masculinities that men envision in their college ages are fulfilled. A study like this could also examine which contextual factors helped or hindered their attainment of a possible masculinity and expand on the barriers that got in the way of attaining a previously envisioned possible masculinity. A study that interviews older men to reflect on their past could especially illuminate contextual factors and barriers they experienced as they developed into the man that they presently are.  As the concept of time was an important aspect of the model, it occurred to the researcher during the research process, that a model could be developed that explains how masculinity itself 149  can change over time. Ultimately, the data itself was not sufficient to model this phenomenon. With consultation with a GT expert, to create a model that explains how masculinities may change over time, much more data collection was needed. Thus, the resulting EPPM was finalized. Future research could aim to collect data to create a model that explains how masculinities change over time, using a similar methodology, such as GT. Results could give researchers more information about the development of masculinities over time and ways that healthy and positive masculinities can be fostered, with the overall goal to help men lead healthy and meaningful lives.  5.6 Conclusion  The EPMM is a theoretical account, grounded in data, used to describe the contextual factors that contribute to how men envision their future possible masculinities. The EPMM further develops the concept of possible masculinities, by defining them as having internal and external domains. The EPMM adds to a developing body of scholarship on men and masculinities. It offers a theoretical account developed empirically to further understand and improve the health behaviours of college aged men, a group that has been identified specifically as being in a health crisis. It is hoped that the EPMM is useful for scholars, researchers and practitioners to understand college age men, and to intervene accordingly, if needed, to promote the achievement of adaptive possible masculinities.  150  References  Addis, M. E., & Mahalik, J. R. (2003). Men, masculinity, and the contexts of help seeking. American Psychologist, 58, 5–14.  Addis, M. E., Mansfield, A. K., & Syzdek, M. R. (2010). Is “masculinity” a problem?  Framing the effects of gendered social learning in men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 77–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018602  Alfred, G. C., Hammer, J. H., & Good, G. E. (2014). Male student veterans: Hardiness,  psychological well-being, and masculine norms. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 95–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031450  American Psychological Association, Boys and Men Guidelines Group. (2018). APA guidelines  for psychological practice with boys and men. Retrieved from  http://www.apa.org/about/policy/psychological-practice-boys-men-guidelines.pdf Angus Reid Institute. (2019). What unites & defines the “West”? In a complicated  confederation, less than one might think. Retrieved from http://angusreid.org/wp- content/uploads/2019/01/2019.01.10-Identity-Release.pdf Barrett, A. E., & White, H. R. (2002). Trajectories of gender role orientations in adolescence and  early adulthood: A prospective study of the mental health effects of masculinity and  femininity. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43, 451–468. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3090237  Bedi, R. P., Young, C. N., Davari, J. A., Springer, K., & Kane, D. P. (2016). A Content Analysis  of Gendered Research in the Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy, 50, 365-383. 151  Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and  Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.  Bem, S. L. (1979). Theory and measurement of androgyny: A reply to the Pedhazur–Tetenbaum  and Locksley–Colten critiques. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1047– 1054.  Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the  sociology of knowledge. New York, NY: Penguin Books.  Bergman, S. J. (1995). Male development and the transformation of shame. In R. Levant., & W.  Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 90–126). New York: Basic Books.  Billig, M. (2001). Discourse, rhetorical and ideological messages. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, &  S. Y. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: A reader (pp. 210–221). London, England: Sage.  Blashill, A. J., & Vander Wal, J. S. (2009). Mediation of gender role conflict and eating  pathology in gay men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10, 204-217. doi:10.1037/a0016000 Bleier, R (1984). Science and gender: A critique of biology and its theories on women. Oxford:  Pergamon.  Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Boudon, R. (2001). The origin of values: Sociology and philosophy of beliefs. Piscataway, NJ:  Transaction Publishers. Bourgois, P., & Schonberg, J. (2007). Ethnic dimensions of habitus among homeless heroin  injectors. Ethnography, 8, 7–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1466138107076109  Brannen, J., & Nilsen, A. (2006). From fatherhood to fathering: Transmission and change among  152  British fathers in four-generation families. Sociology, 40, 335–352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038038506062036  Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture’s blueprint for manhood and what it’s done  for us lately. In D. David & R. Brannon (Eds.), The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex role (pp. 1–49). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.  Bronfrenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and  design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human  development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Brooks, G. R., & Elder, W. B. (2016). History and future of the psychology of men and  masculinities. In Wong, J., & Wester, R., APA handbook of men and masculinities. (pp. 3-21). Washington;US;DC; American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14594-001 Brooks, G. R., & Silverstein, L. S. (1995). Understanding the dark side of masculinity: An  interactive systems model. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 280–333). New York, NY: Basic Books.  Brown, L. S. (2004). Subversive dialogues: Theory in feminist therapy. New York: Basic Books.  Burkley, M., Wong, Y. J., & Bell, A. C. (2016). The Masculinity Contingency Scale (MCS):  Scale development and psychometric properties. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 17, 113–125.  Bursley, K. H. (1995). Gender role strain and help-seeking attitudes and behavior in college  Men. Unpublished dissertation.  Buss, D. M. (1995). Psychological sex differences: Origins through sexual selection. American  Psychologist, 50, 164–168.  153  Cardwell, M. (1996). Dictionary of Psychology. Chicago IL: Fitzroy Dearborn. Charmaz, K. (2000). Constructivist and objectivist grounded theory. In N. K. Denzin & Y.  Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Chickering, A., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.  Cole, B. P., Petronzi, G. J., Singley, D. B., & Baglieri, M. (2018). Predictors of men's  psychotherapy preferences. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 19, 45-56. doi:10.1002/capr.12201 Connell, R. (2014). The study of masculinities. Qualitative Research Journal, 14, 5-15.  doi:10.1108/QRJ-03-2014-0006 Connell, R. (2002). Studying men and masculinity. Resources for Feminist Research, 29, 43. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Polity Press: Cambridge. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.  Constantinople, A. (1973). Masculinity-femininity: An exception to a famous  dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80, 389-407. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Coston, B. M., & Kimmel, M. (2012). Seeing privilege where it Isn’t: Marginalized masculinities  and the intersectionality of privilege. Journal of Social Issues, 68, 97-111. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01738.x  Courtenay, W. H. (2000). Constructions of masculinity and their influence on men’s well-being:  A theory of gender and health. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 1385–1401. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods  154  approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Currier, D. M. (2013). Strategic ambiguity: Protecting emphasized femininity and hegemonic  masculinity in the hookup culture. Gender and Society, 27, 704-727. doi:10.1177/0891243213493960 Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1983). Sex, evolution, and behavior (2nd ed.). Boston: PWS Publishers. Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or, the preservation of  favoured races in the struggle for life. London: J. Murray. Davies, J., & Liang, C. (2015). A test of the mediating role of gender role conflict: Latino  masculinities and help-seeking attitudes. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16, 23-32. doi:10.1037/a0035320 Davies, J., McCrae, B. P., Frank, J., Dochnahl, A., Pickering, T., Harrison, B., . . . Wilson, K.  (2000). Identifying male college students' perceived health needs, barriers to seeking help, and recommendations to help men adopt healthier lifestyles. Journal of American College Health, 48, 259-267. doi:10.1080/07448480009596267 Davies, J. A., Shen-Miller, D. S., & Isacco, A. (2010). The men's center approach to addressing  the health crisis of college men. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41,  347-354. doi:10.1037/a0020308    Davis-Gage, D. (2011). Gender and group leadership: Using the research to improve counseling  practice. Retrieved from http://counselingoutfitters.com/vistas/vistas11/ Article_61.pdf  DeFranc, W. J. (1999). Parental attachment and psychological separation in relation to gender  role strain in men. Unpublished dissertation.  Dempster, S. (2011). I drink, therefore I'm man: Gender discourses, alcohol and the construction  155  of British undergraduate masculinities. Gender and Education, 23, 635-653. doi:10.1080/09540253.2010.527824 Dennis, A. (2011). Symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology. Symbolic Interaction, 34,  349-356. doi:10.1525/si.2011.34.3.349 Denzin, N.K. (1989) Interpretive Interactionism. Sage, Newbury Park. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd  ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Collecting and interpreting qualitative material.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  Deutsch, C. J., & Gilbert, L. A. (1976). Sex role stereotypes: Effect on perceptions of self and  others and on personal adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 23, 373–379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.23.4.373  Dewey, J. (1929). The question for certainty. New York: G. P. Putnam.  Dheer, R., Lenartowicz, T., Peterson, M. F., & Petrescu, M. (2014). Cultural regions of canada  and united states: Implications for international management research. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 14, 343-384. doi:10.1177/1470595814543706 Diamond, M. J. (2004). Accessing the multitude within: A psychoanalytic perspective on the  transformation of masculinity at mid-life. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 85, 45–64. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1516/3PFY-NQMU-C95F-HH0W  Deil-Amen, Regina. (2011). The “Traditional” College Student: A Smaller and Smaller  Minority and Its Implications for Diversity and Access Institutions.” Paper presented at Mapping Broad Access Higher Education Conference, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.  156  Duneier, M. (1992). Slim’s table: Race, respectability, and masculinity. Chicago, IL: University  of Chicago Press.  Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1997). Jockeying for position: The construction of masculine  identities. Discourse & Society, 8, 203–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008002004  Edwards, K. E., & Jones, S. R. (2009). "Putting my man face on": A grounded theory of college  men's gender identity development. Journal of College Student Development, 50, 210. Eisler, R. M. (1995). The relationship between masculine gender role stress and men’s health  risk: The validation of a construct. In R. Levant & W. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 207–225). New York, NY: Basic Books.  Eisler, R. M., Franchina, J. J., Moore, T. M., Honeycutt, H. G., & Rhatigan, D. L. (2000).  Masculine gender role stress and intimate abuse: Effects of gender relevance of conflict situations on men’s attributions and affective responses. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 1, 30–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1524- 9220.1.1.30  Eisler, R. M., & Skidmore, J. R. (1987). Masculine gender role stress: Scale development and  component factors in the appraisal of stressful situations. Behavior Modification, 11, 123–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01454455870112001  Eisler, R. M., Skidmore, J. R., & Ward, C. H. (1988). Masculine gender-role stress: Predictor of  anger, anxiety, and health-risk behaviors. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 133–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_12  Emmanuel, G., & Delaney, H. (2014). Professors' influence on students' beliefs, values, and  attitudes in the classroom. Journal of College and Character, 15, 245-258. doi:10.1515/jcc-2014-0029 157  Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.  Estrada, F., & Arciniega, G. M. (2015). Positive masculinity among latino men and the direct  and indirect effects on well-being. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 43, 191. doi:10.1002/jmcd.12014 Fausto-Sterling, A. (1985). Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New  York: Basic Books. Fischer, A. R. (2007). Parental relationship quality and masculine gender-role strain in young  men: Mediating effects of personality. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 328-358. doi:10.1177/0011000005283394 Freer, P. K. (2010) Two decades of research on possible selves and the ‘missing males’  problem in choral music. International Journal of Music Education, 28, 17–30. doi: 10.1177/0255761409351341 Freer, P. K. (2009) ‘I’ll sing with my buddies’ – Fostering the possible selves of male choral  singers. International Journal of Music Education, 27, 341–355. doi: 10.1177/0255761409345918 Funk, L. C., & Werhun, C. D. (2011). “You’re such a girl!” the psychological drain of the  gender-role harassment of men. Sex Roles, 65, 13-22. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9948-x García-Sánchez, R., Almendros, C., Gámez-Guadix, M., Martín, M. J., Aramayona, B., &  Martínez, J. M. (2018). Assessment of conflicts associated with a traditional masculine gender role in spanish college men and women. Sex Roles, 78, 81-93. doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0765-8 Garrison, Y. L., Kim, J. Y. C., & Liu, W. M. (2018). A qualitative study of korean men  158  experiencing stress due to nonprestigious hakbeol. The Counseling Psychologist, 46, 786-813. doi:10.1177/0011000018798042 Gelfer, J. (2017, January 29). Men, Women, and the Challenge of Individual and Systemic  Privilege. Retrieved from https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/men-women-and-the-challenge-of-individual-and-systemic-privilege-wcz/  Ghosh, S. (2015, March 16). Gender Identity. Retrieved from  https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/917990-overview Gilder. G. (1986). Men and marriage. London: Pelican.  Glaser, B. G., & Holton, J. (2004). Remodeling grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative  sozialforschung/ Forum: qualitative social research, 5, 2.  Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research (Reprinted 2006 ed.). London (U.K.): Aldine Transaction. Goldfoot, D. & Neff, D. (1987). Assessment of behavioral sex differences in social contexts:  Perspectives from primatology. In J. M. Reinisch, L. A. Rosenblum, & S. A. Sanders (Eds.), Masculinity/femininity: Basic perspectives (pp. 179-195). New York: Oxford University Press.  Good, G. E., & Wood, P. K. (1995). Male gender role conflict, depression, and help seeking: Do  college men face double jeopardy? Journal of Counseling & Development, 74, 70-75. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1995.tb01825.x Gough, B. (2001). 'biting your tongue': Negotiating masculinities in contemporary  britain. Journal of Gender Studies, 10, 169-185. doi:10.1080/09589230120053292 Griffiths, S., Murray, S. B., & Touyz, S. (2015). Extending the masculinity hypothesis: An  159  investigation of gender role conformity, body dissatisfaction, and disordered eating in young heterosexual men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16, 108–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035958  Groeschel, B. L., Wester, S. R., & Sedivy, S. K. (2010). Gender role conflict, alcohol, and help  seeking among college men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 123-139. doi:10.1037/a0018365 Haines, E. L., Deaux, K., & Lofaro, N. (2016). The times they are a-changing … or are they not?  A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 353-363. doi:10.1177/0361684316634081 Hall, C. S., Lindzey, G., & Campbell, J. B. (1997). Theories of personality (4th ed.). New York:  J. Wiley & Sons. Hammer, J. H., & Good, G. E. (2010). Positive psychology: An empirical examination of  beneficial aspects of endorsement of masculine norms. Psychology of Men &Masculinity, 11, 303–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019056  Hammer, J. H., Vogel, D. L., & Heimerdinger-Edwards, S. R. (2013). Men’s help seeking:  Examination of differences across community size, education, and income. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14, 65–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0026813  Hamwey, M., Allen, L., Hay, M., & Varpio, L. (2019). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model of  human development: Applications for health professions education. Academic Medicine, 94, 1621-1621. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000002822 Harris, F., III. (2010). College men's meanings of masculinities and contextual influences:  Toward a conceptual model. Journal of College Student Development, 51, 297. Harris, F., & Edwards, K. (2010). College men's experiences as men: Findings and  160  implications from two grounded theory studies. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 47, 3. Hetzel, R. D. (1998). Gender role strain and perceived social support as correlates of  psychological distress in males. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 58, 3955. Howard-Payne, L. (2016;2015;). Glaser or strauss? considerations for selecting a grounded theory study. South African Journal of Psychology, 46, 50-62. doi:10.1177/0081246315593071 Isacco, A. (2015). Measuring masculinity: Developmental contexts, men’s health, and  qualitative research. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16, 141-144. doi:10.1037/a0039018  Isacco, A. & Wade, J. (2017). A review of selected theoretical perspectives and research in the  psychology of men and masculinities. In Levant, Ronald F. (Ed); Wong, Y. Joel (Ed), The psychology of men and masculinities. (pp. 139-168). American Psychological Association.  Iwamoto, D. K., Corbin, W., Lejuez, C., & MacPherson, L. (2014). College men and alcohol use:  Positive alcohol expectancies as a mediator between distinct masculine norms and alcohol use. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 29-39. Kaplan, D., Rosenmann, A., & Shuhendler S. (2017) What about Nontraditional Masculinities?  Toward a Quantitative Model of Therapeutic New Masculinity Ideology. Men and  Masculinities, 20, 393-426. Kay, S. A. & Miekle, D. B. (1984). Political ideology, sociobiology, and the U.S. women’s right  161  movement. In. M. W. Watts (Ed.), Biopolitics and gender (pp. 67-96). New York: Haworth.  Kaya, A., Iwamoto, D. K., Brady, J., Clinton, L., & Grivel, M. (2018). The role of masculine  norms and gender role conflict on prospective well-being among men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/men0000155 Kenny, M., & Fourie, R. (2015). Contrasting classic, straussian, and constructivist grounded theory: Methodological and philosophical conflicts. The Qualitative Report, 20, 1270. Khan, J. S. (2009). An introduction to masculinities. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Kilmartin, C. (2010). The masculine self (4th ed.). Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan Pub. Kilmartin, C. T. (1994). The masculine self. New York, NY, England: Macmillan Publishing Co,  Inc. Kimmel, S. B., & Mahalik, J. R. (2005). Body image concerns of gay men: The roles of minority  stress and conformity to masculine norms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1185–1190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1185  Kiselica, M. S., Benton-Wright, S., & Englar-Carlson, M. (2016). Accentuating positive  masculinity: A new foundation for the psychology of boys, men, and masculinity. In Y. J. Wong & S. R. Wester (Eds.), APA handbook of men and masculinities (pp. 123–143). http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14594-006 Kiselica, M. S., & Englar-Carlson, M. (2010). Identifying, affirming, and building upon male  Strengths: The positive psychology/positive masculinity model of psychotherapy with boys and men. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47, 276-287. doi:10.1037/a0021159 Kleinfeld, J. (2009). No map to manhood: Male and female mindsets behind the college gender  162  gap. Gender Issues, 26, 171-182. doi:10.1007/s12147-009-9083-y Korcuska, J. S., & Thombs, D. L. (2003). Gender role conflict and sex-specific drinking norms:  Relationships to alcohol use in undergraduate women and men. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 204-216. doi:10.1353/csd.2003.0017 Koss, M. P., Gidycz, C. A., & Wisniewski, N. (1987). The scope of rape: Incidence and  prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of higher education students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 162-170. Krugman, S. (1995). Male development and the transformation of shame. In R. F. Levant & W.  S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 91-126). New York, NY, US: Basic Books. Levant, R. F. (2008). How do we understand masculinity? An editorial. Psychology of Men &  Masculinity, 9, 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.9.1.1  Levant, R. F. (2006). Effective psychotherapy with men [DVD and viewer’s guide]. San  Francisco, CA: Psychotherapy.net.  Levant, R. F. (1992). Toward the reconstruction of masculinity. Journal of Family Psychology,  5, 379–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.5.3-4.379  Levant, R., Allen, P., & Lien, M. (2014). Alexithymia in men: How and when do emotional  processing deficiencies occur? Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 324-334. doi:10.1037/a0033860 Levant, R. F., Cuthbert, A. C., Richmond, K., Sellers, A., Matveev, A., Matina, O., & Soklovsky,  M. (2003). Masculinity ideology among Russian and U.S. young men and women and its relationship to unhealthy lifestyle habits among young Russian men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 26–36.  163  Levant, R. F., Hall, R. J., & Rankin, T. J. (2013). Male Role Norms Inventory—Short Form  (MRNI–SF): Development, confirmatory factor analytic investigation of structure, and measurement invariance across gender. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60, 228–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031545  Levant, R. F., Halter, M. J., Hayden, E., & Williams, C. (2009). The efficacy of alexithymia  reduction treatment: A pilot study. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 17, 75–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.3149/jms.1701.75  Levant, R. F., & Majors, R. (1997). An investigation into variations in the construction of the  male gender role among young African-American and European-American women and men. Journal of Gender, Culture, and Health, 2, 33–43.  Levant, R. & Powell, W. (2017). The gender role strain paradigm. In Levant, Ronald F. (Ed);  Wong, Y. Joel (Ed), The psychology of men and masculinities. (pp. 15-43). American Psychological Association. Levant, R. F., Rankin, T. J., Williams, C., Hasan, N. T., & Smalley, K. B. (2010). Evaluation of  the factor structure and construct validity of the Male Role Norms Inventory—Revised (MRNI–R). Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 25–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017637  Levant, R. F., Richmond, K., Majors, R. G., Inclan, J. E., Rossello, J. M., Heesacker, M., . . .  Sellers, A. (2003). A multicultural investigation of masculinity ideology and alexithymia. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 91–99. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.4.2.91  Liu, W. M., & Rochlen, A. B. (2005). The study of men and masculinity as an important  multicultural competency consideration. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 685-697. doi:10.1002/jclp.20103 164  Liu, W. M., Rochlen, A. B., & Mohr, J. (2005). Real and ideal gender role conflict: Exploring  psychological distress among men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6, 137–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.6.2.137  Lo, C. O. (2014). Enhancing groundedness in realist grounded theory research. Qualitative  Psychology, 1, 61-76. doi:10.1037/qup0000001 Locke, K. (1996). Rewriting the discovery of grounded theory after 25 years? Journal of  Management Inquiry, 5, 239–245. Mahalik, J. R. (2000). A model of masculine gender role conformity. Paper presented at  the 108th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.  Mahalik, J. R., Locke, B. D., Ludlow, L. H., Diemer, M. A., Scott, R. P. J., Gottfried, M., &  Freitas, G. (2003). Development of the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 3–25. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/1524-9220.4.1.3  Mankowski, E. S., & Maton, K. I. (2010). A community psychology of men and  masculinity: Historical and conceptual review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 73-86. doi:10.1007/s10464-009-9288-y Mannheim, K. (1936). Ideology and utopia: An introduction to the sociology of knowledge.  London, England: Routledge.  Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.  doi:10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954 Mathison, S. (2016). Grounded Theory. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://blogs.ubc.ca/qualresearch/methodologies/grounded-theory/ May, R. J. (1986). Concerning a psychoanalytic view of maleness. The Psychoanalytic Review.  165  73, 579–597. McCullough, L. (2016). The processes of engaging in mandated addiction treatment: A  grounded theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.  McDermott, R., Naylor, P., McKelvey, D., & Kantra, L. (2017). College men's and women's  masculine gender role strain and dating violence acceptance attitudes: Testing sex as a moderator. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 18, 99-111. doi:10.1037/men0000044 McDermott, R. C., Pietrantonio, K. R., Browning, B. R., McKelvey, D. K., Jones, Z. K., Booth,  N. R., & Sevig, T. D. (2018). In search of positive masculine role norms: Testing the positive psychology positive masculinity paradigm. Psychology of Men & Masculinity. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/men0000160 McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming to see  correspondences through work in women s studies. Working Paper no. 189. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Center for Research on Women. McIntosh, H., Metz, E., & Youniss, J. (2005). Community service and identity formation in  adolescents. In J. L. Mahoney, R. W. Larson, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs (pp. 331–352). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Molenaar, C., & Liang, C. T. H. (2020). A brief qualitative exploration of men’s possible  masculinities. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 21, 321-326. doi:10.1037/men0000231 Moon, K & Blackman, D. (2014). A guide to understanding social science research for natural scientists. Conservation Biology, doi: 10.1111/cobi.12326 Moradi, B., Velez, B. L., & Parent, M. C. (2013). The theory of male reference group identity  166  dependence: Roles of social desirability, masculinity ideology, and collective identity. Sex Roles, 68, 415–426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11199-013-0258-3  Morawski, J. G. (1985). The measurement of masculinity and femininity: Engendering  categorical realities. Journal of Personality, 53, 196-223. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1985.tb00364.x Mounce, H. O. (1996). The two pragmatisms: From Peirce to Rorty. London, UK: Routledge. Muñoz Boudet, A., Petesch, P., Turk, C., & Thumala, A. (2012). On norms and agency:  Conversations about gender equality with women and men in 20 countries. Washington, DC: World Bank. Nabavi, R. (2004). The “Masculinity Attitudes, Stress, and Conformity questionnaire (MASC)”:  A new measure for studying psychology of men [Doctoral dissertation]. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. The Sciences and Engineering, 65, 2641. O’Neil, J. M. (2008). Summarizing 25 years of research on men’s gender role conflict using the  Gender Role Conflict Scale: New research paradigms and clinical implications. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 358–445. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/0011000008317057  O’Neil, J. M., & Egan, J. (1992). Men and women’s gender role journeys: Metaphors for  healing, transition, and transformation. In B. Wainrib (Ed.), Gender issues across the lifecycle (pp. 107–123). New York, NY: Springer.  O’Neil, J. M., & Egan, J. (1993). Abuses of power against women: Sexism, gender role conflict,  and psychological violence. In E. P. Cook (Ed.), Women, relationships, and power: Implications for counseling (pp. 49–78). Alexandria, VA: ACA Press.  O’Neil, J. M., Egan, J., Owen, S. V., & Murry, V. (1993). The Gender Role Journey Measure  167  (GRJM): Scale development and psychometric evaluations. Sex Roles, 28, 167–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00299279  O’Neil, J. M., Helms, B., Gable, R., David, L., & Wrightsman, L. (1986). Gender role conflict  Scale: College men’s fear of femininity. Sex Roles, 14, 335–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00287583  O'Neil, J. M., Wester, S. R., Heesacker, M., & Snowden, S. J. (2017). Masculinity as a heuristic:  Gender role conflict theory, superorganisms, and system-level thinking. In Levant, Ronald F. (Ed); Wong, Y. Joel (Ed), The psychology of men and masculinities. (pp. 75-103). American Psychological Association. Oliffe, J. L., Galdas, P. M., Han, C. S., & Kelly, M. T. (2013). Faux masculinities among college  men who experience depression. Health, 17, 75-92. doi:10.1177/1363459312447256 Oliffe, J. L., Rice, S., Kelly, M. T., Ogrodniczuk, J. S., Broom, A., Robertson, S., & Black, N.  (2019). A mixed-methods study of the health-related masculine values among young Canadian men. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 20, 310–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000157  Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990). Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of Personality  and Social Psychology, 59, 112-125. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.1.112 Palmer II, B. (2018, January 1). Men’s Intersectional Relationship to Male Privilege. Retrieved  from https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/who-we-ought-be/201801/men-s-intersectional-relationship-male-privilege  Pederson, E. L., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). Male gender role conflict and willingness to seek  counseling: Testing a mediation model on college-aged men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 373-384. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.54.4.373 168  PettyJohn, M. E., Muzzey, F. K., Maas, M. K., & McCauley, H. L. (2019). HowIWillChange:  Engaging men and boys in the #MeToo movement. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 20, 612-622. doi:10.1037/men0000186 Phillips, D. C., & Burbules, N. C. (2000). Postpositivism and educational research. Lanham,  MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Pleck, J. H. (1981). The myth of masculinity. Cambridge: MIT Press. Pleck, E. H. (1987). Domestic tyranny: The making of social policy against family violence from  colonial times to the present. New York: Oxford University Press. Powell., S. J. (2015) Masculinity and choral singing: An Australian perspective. International  Journal of Music Education, 33, 233–243. DOI: 10.1177/0255761414533307 Powell, S. J.  (2017). Choral possible selves: The interaction of australian males’ past, present  and future identities in shaping decisions about participation in choir. British Journal of Music Education, 34, 57-69. doi:10.1017/S0265051716000292 Pratkanis, A. R., Breckler, S. J., & Greenwald, A. G. (2014). Attitude, structure, and function.  New York, NY: Psychology Press. Rathus, S. A., Nevid, J. S., Fichner-Rathus, L., Herold, E. S. (2010). Human sexuality in a world  of diversity (3rd Canadian ed.). Toronto: Pearson Canada. Reidy, D. E., Berke, D. S., Gentile, B., & Zeichner, A. (2015). Masculine discrepancy stress,  substance use, assault and injury in a survey of U.S. men. Injury Prevention. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2015-041599 Rice, S., Fallon, B., & Bambling, M. (2011). Men and depression: The impact of masculine role  norms throughout the lifespan. The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 28, 133–144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1375/aedp.28.2.133  169  Robertson, J. M., Lin, C., Woodford, J., Danos, K. K., & Hurst, M. A. (2001). The (un)  emotional male: Physiological, verbal, and written correlates of expressiveness. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 9, 393–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.3149/jms.0903.393  Roccas, S., Sagiv, L. (2017). Values and behavior: Taking a cross cultural perspective. New  York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-56352-7 Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York, NY: John Wiley Rosa, E. M., & Tudge, J. (2013). Urie bronfenbrenner's theory of human development: Its  evolution from ecology to bioecology: The evolution of urie bronfenbrenner's theory. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 5, 243-258. doi:10.1111/jftr.12022 Roy, K. M. (2008). A life course perspective on fatherhood and family policies in the United  States and South Africa. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice About Men as Fathers, 6, 92–112.  Roy, K. M. (2006). Father stories: A life course examination of paternal identity among low- income African American men. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 31–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192513X05275432  Rummell, C., & Levant, R. F. (2014). Masculine gender role discrepancy strain and self-esteem.  Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 419–426. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/a0035304  Sapolsky, R. M. (1997). The trouble with testosterone: Will boys just be boys? In R. M.  Sapolsky, The trouble with testosterone and other essays on the biology of the human predicament (pp. 147–159). New York: Touchstone.  Schwartz, M. D., & DeKeseredy, W. S. (1997). Sexual assault on the college campus: The role  of male peer support. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc. Schwartz, J. P., & Tylka, T. L. (2008). Exploring entitlement as a moderator and mediator of the  170  relationship between masculine gender role conflict and men's body esteem. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 9, 67-81. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.9.2.67 Schwitzgebel, E. (2006b). Do things look flat? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 72,  589–599. Seale, C. (2002). Quality issues in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Social Work, 1, 97-110.  doi:10.1177/1473325002001001747 Seymour-Smith, S. (2017). A critical discursive approach to studying masculinties. In Levant,  Ronald F. (Ed); Wong, Y. Joel (Ed), The psychology of men and masculinities. (pp. 105- 138). American Psychological Association. Seymour-Smith, S., Brown, D., Cosma, G., Shopland, N., Battersby, S. & Burton, A. (in press).  “I really don’t want a doctor to be examining, you know, my back bottom”: The digital rectal examination as a barrier to prostate cancer diagnosis in African-Caribbean men. Psycho-Oncology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.4219  Seymour-Smith, S., Wetherell, M., & Phoenix, A. (2002). “My wife ordered me to come!”: A  discursive analysis of doctors’ and nurses’ accounts of men’s use of general practitioners. Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 253–267. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1359105302007003220  Shek, Y. L., & McEwen, M. K. (2012). The relationships of racial identity and gender role  conflict to self-esteem of asian american undergraduate men. Journal of College Student Development, 53, 703-718. doi:10.1353/csd.2012.0065 Shen‐Miller, D. S., Isacco, A., Davies, J. A., St. Jean, M., & Phan, J. L. (2013). The men's center  approach: Ecological interventions for college men's health. Journal of Counseling & Development, 91, 499-507. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2013.00123.x 171  Shepherd, C., & Rickard, K. (2012). Drive for muscularity and help-seeking: The mediational  role of gender role conflict, self-stigma, and attitudes. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 13, 379-392. doi:10.1037/a0025923 Sherif, M. (1962). The self and reference groups: Meeting ground of individual and group  approaches. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 96, 797–813. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1962.tb50163.x  Sikolia, D., Biros, D., Mason, M., & Weiser, M. (2013). Trustworthiness of Grounded  Theory Methodology Research in Information Systems. MWAIS 2013 Proceedings. 16. Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/mwais2013/16 Singh, G.K., Kochanek, K.D., & MacDorman, M.F. (1994). Advance Report of Final Mortality  Statistics. Monthly Vital Statistics Report. 4. Sirin, S. R., McCreary, D. R., & Mahalik, J. R. (2004). Differential Reactions to Men and  Women's Gender Role Transgressions: Perceptions of Social Status, Sexual Orientation, and Value Dissimilarity. The Journal of Men's Studies, 12, 119-132. Smiler, A. P. (2004). Thirty years after the discovery of gender: Psychological concepts and  measures of masculinity. Sex Roles, 50, 15-26. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000011069.02279.4c Smith, S. (2006). Encouraging the use of reflexivity in the writing up of qualitative  research. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 13, 209-215. doi:10.12968/ijtr.2006.13.5.21377 Statistics Canada. (2005). Table 3 Postsecondary participation rates of young adults aged 24 to  26 by December 2005, by demographic characteristics and type of institution attended.  Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/81-595-m/2008070/6000003- 172  eng.htm Steinfeldt, J. A., Gilchrist, G. A., Halterman, A. W., Gomory, A., & Steinfeldt, M. C. (2011).  Drive for muscularity and conformity to masculine norms among college football players. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12, 324–338. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/a0024839  Steinfeldt, J. A., Steinfeldt, M. C., England, B., & Speight, Q. L. (2009). Gender role conflict  and stigma toward help-seeking among college football players. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10, 261-272. doi:10.1037/a0017223 Strauss A. L., Corbin J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures  and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Tannenbaum, C., & Frank, B. (2011). Masculinity and health in late life men. American Journal  of Men’s Health, 5, 243–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1557988310384609  Terman, L. M., & Miles, C. C. (1936). Sex and Personality. New Haven, CT, US: Yale  Thompson, E. H., & Bennett, K. M. (2015). Measurement of masculinity ideologies: A (critical)  review. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16, 115-133. doi:10.1037/a003860 Thompson, E. & Bennett (2017). Masculinity ideologies. In Levant, Ronald F. (Ed); Wong, Y.  Joel (Ed), The psychology of men and masculinities. (pp. 45-74). American Psychological Association. Todd, D. (2017). One out of six UBC students is a white male. Retrieved from  https://vancouversun.com/news/staff-blogs/one-in-six-ubc-students-are-white-males Turner, S. E., & Bowen, W. G. (1999). Choice of major: The changing (unchanging) gender gap.  Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 52, 289-313. doi:10.1177/001979399905200208 Turner, J. C., Leno, E. V., & Keller, A. (2013). Causes of mortality among american college  173  students: A pilot study. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 27, 31-42. doi:10.1080/87568225.2013.739022University Press. Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K. (2013). Hard won and easily lost: A review and synthesis of  theory and research on precarious manhood. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14, 101–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029826  Vandello, J. A., Bosson, J. K., Cohen, D., Burnaford, R. M., & Weaver, J. R. (2008). Precarious  manhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1325–1339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012453 Villancourt, R. (2010). Gender Differences in Police-reported Violence Crime in Canada, 2008.  Statistics Canada. Wade, J. C. (1998). Male reference group identity dependence: A theory of male identity. The  Counseling Psychologist, 26, 349–383. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/0011000098263001  Wade, J. C. (2001). Professional men’s attitudes toward race and gender equity. The Journal of  Men’s Studies, 10, 73–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.3149/jms.1001.73  Wade, J. C., & Brittan-Powell, C. S. (2000). Male reference group identity dependence:  Support for construct validity. Sex Roles, 43, 323–340. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1023/A:1026695209399  Wade, J. C., & Coughlin, P. (2012). Male reference group identity dependence, masculinity  ideology, and relationship satisfaction in men’s heterosexual romantic relationships. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 13, 325–339. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/a0026278  Wade, J. C., & Gelso, C. J. (1998). Reference Group Identity Dependence Scale: A measure of  male identity. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 384–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000098263002  174  Wahto, R., & Swift, J. K. (2016). Labels, gender-role conflict, stigma, and attitudes toward  seeking psychological help in men. American Journal of Men's Health, 10, 181-191. doi:10.1177/1557988314561491 Waugh, B. (2011). Canadians and Americans are more similar than assumed. Retrieved from  https://news.ubc.ca/2011/07/07/canadians-and-americans-are-more-similar-than- assumed/ Weaver, L. (2008). Facilitating change in men who are violent towards women: Considering the  ethics and efficacy of a person-centered approach. Journal of the World Association for Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapy and Counseling, 7, 173–184.  Weaver, J., Vandello, J., Bosson, J., & Burnaford, R. (2010). The proof is in the punch: Gender  differences in perceptions of action and aggression as components of manhood. Sex Roles, 62, 241–251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9713-6  Western Washington University. (2018). Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. Retrieved from  https://www.wwu.edu/diversity#fac-staff-demographics Westwood, M. J., & Black, T. G. (2012). Introduction to the special issue of the canadian journal  of counselling and Psychotherapy/Introduction au numéro spécial de la revue canadienne de counseling et de psychothérapie. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy (Online), 46, 285. Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1999). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and  psycho-discursive practices. Feminism & Psychology, 9, 335–356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959353599009003012 Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (2014). A discursive psychological framework for analysing men  175  and masculinities. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 355–364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037148 White, J.W., and Smith, P.H. (2004). Sexual Assault Perpetration and Re-Perpetration: From  Adolescence to Young Adulthood. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 182–202.  Whorley, M. R., & Addis, M. E. (2006). Ten years of psychological research on men and  masculinity in the United States: Dominant methodological trends. Sex Roles, 55, 649–658. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9120-1  Wilkins, A. C. (2012). Stigma and Status: Interracial intimacy and intersectional identities  among black college men. Gender and Society, 26, 165-189. doi:10.1177/0891243211434613 Williams, D. R. (2008). The health of men: Structured inequalities and opportunities. American  Journal of Public Health, 98, http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.98.Supplement_1.S150  Wilson, Edward O. (1975). Sociobiology: the new synthesis. Cambridge: Belknap Press. Wimer, D. J., & Levant, R. F. (2011). The relationship of masculinity and help-seeking style  with the academic help-seeking behavior of college men. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 19, 256–274. http://dx.doi.org/10.3149/jms.1903.256  Wong, Y. J., Steinfeldt, J. A., Speight, Q. L., & Hickman, S. L. (2010). Content analysis of  Psychology of Men and Masculinity (2000–2008). Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 170–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019133  Yamawaki, N. (2010). The effects of self-construal and masculinity vs. femininity: A  comparison of american and japanese attitudes toward mental health services. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 32, 154-167. doi:10.17744/mehc.32.2.3h63l3820147l518  176  Appendices Appendix A – Informed Consent   A. 1 Informed Consent, Western Washington University  INFORMED CONSENT  FOR PARTICIPATION IN RESEARCH PROJECT  PROJECT TITLE:   Men’s Resiliency at Western Washington University  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Brennan Gilbert, Psy. D., Dan Walinsky, Ph.D., & Mark Schneider, MSEd LOCATION OF PROJECT:  Western Washington University   Counseling Center  Old Main 540  516 High Street   Bellingham, WA 98225-9052 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This study uses focus group research to understand and build theory about men’s resiliency on the Western Washington University campus and to assess the perceived saliency of this concept to Western male students. We will learn more about how male-identified students understand resiliency, understand themselves as resilient being, and how they use (or do not use) recourses available to them on campus.   Your participation in the study will involve attending a 1.5-hour long focus group and being asked to discuss and reflect on issues related to men’s health, resiliency, and help seeking behavior. The information you provide will be gathered by the primary researchers and added to the data other members provide. This data will be analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods, and the results may be shared with other WWU student service offices, other universities, and in processional presentations and publications.   177  DESCRIPTION OF EXCLUSION CRITERIA:  You must be 18 years of age or older and male identified to participate.  EXPECTED BENEFITS AND RISKS:  Participating in a focus group may increase your awareness and insight into gender socialization. In addition, you may be informed of additional resources and supports for men in distress. Your participation will help provide data about the experience of college men, informing future student support programming and the identification and conceptualization of men’s health and resilience. Food will be provided for participants.   Discussing personal feelings and opinions in a public setting can induce anxiety and discomfort. Additionally, you may be asked to recall and discuss difficult times in your life and how you addressed your problem at this time. In the even these feelings become problematic, please contact the Counseling Center at (360) 650 – 3162 to address your concerns.  DATA COLLECTION AND STORAGE:  As part of your participation in the focus groups, the content of the groups will be audio recorded and you will be asked to fill out a questionnaire at the end of the focus group. You will be asked to provide demographic data, but no personally identifying information (e.g., name, WWU ID) will be gathered. As such, there are virtually no risks to your confidentiality. The data collected will be kept in a secure, locked location within the counseling center at all times and the questionnaire will be kept in a password, encrypted location.   RIGHT TO DISCONTINUE PARTICIPATION:  Your participation is voluntary. You are free to withdraw, choose not to have your data included in the study, or discontinue participation in this project at any time without any penalty or loss of benefits. A copy of this information consent will be provided to you.  If you have any questions about the project or interested in the results when they become available, please contact Brennan Gilbert or Dan Walinsky at (360) 650 – 3164.   If you have questions about your rights as a research subject, you may contact WWU Research Compliance Officer (RCO), Janai Symons, at (360) 650 – 3082. In the event you suffer any research related injuries or adverse effects as a result of participation in the study, contact Dr. Brennan Gilbert, Dr. Daniel Walinsky, and/or Janai Symons.  I am at least 18 years of age. I will allow my data to be added to this project.  Name: _________________________________Date __________________________________  178  A2. Informed Consent, University British Columbia      Consent Form  Study Title: Exploring how Men Envision their Futures as Men: A Grounded Theory   Who is conducting the study?  Principal Investigator: Robinder P. Bedi Ph.D., Assistance Professor, Department of Counselling Psychology, Educational Psychology and Special Education, University of British Columbia, Phone: (604) 822-4185, Email: robinder.bedi@ubc.ca Co-Investigator:  Rajeena P. Kumar, B.A., Graduate Student, Department of Counselling Psychology, Educational Psychology and Special Education, University of British Columbia, Phone: (604) 786-2611, Email: kumarrajeena@alumni.bc.ca  Why are we doing this study? When compared to women, men face worse health outcomes: on average, they have shorter lifespans and are more likely to die from cancer and heart disease. Compared to college aged women, college aged men in particular face their own additional challenges including engaging in risky behaviour and dropping out of school more often. Some researchers connect these outcomes to men and their masculinities. This study aims to add to the literature on how masculinities can be helpful for men by examining the concept of possible masculinities (i.e., how men envision themselves as men in the future) by building a theory. The results of the study can be used to improve psychotherapeutic interventions that can help college aged men lead healthier lives. The present research study will be used to create a thesis to meet the requirements of a Master of Arts in Counselling Psychology at the University of British Columbia of the co-investigator.   How is the study done? This study uses focus group research to understand and build a theory about men understand themselves as men and how they envision their futures as men. Your participation in the study will involve attending a 1.5-hour long focus group and being asked to discuss and reflect on issues related to how men envision their futures as men. The focus group will be audio recorded and you will be asked to provide demographics data. The information you provide will be gathered by the primary researchers and added to the data other members provide. This data will be analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods. Approximately 4 weeks after participating in the focus group, half of the participants will be randomly contacted for their feedback on the analysis of the data.   Vancouver Campus 2125 Main Mall Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4 Tel: 604.822.3131  Fax: 604.822.2684 Phone 604 822 0242 Fax 604 822 3302     179    What will happen to the results of the study? The results will be reported in a graduate thesis and may be shared with other universities, and in processional presentations and publications. If you are interested in the results when they become available, please contact the principal Investigator at robinder.bedi@ubc.ca or the co-investigator at kumarrajeena@alumni.ubc.ca.    Is there any way being in this study could be bad for you? Discussing personal feelings and opinions in a public setting can induce anxiety and discomfort. Additionally, you may be asked to recall and discuss difficult times in your life and how you addressed your problem at this time. In the even these feelings become problematic, please contact the UBC Counseling Services at 604 822 3811 to address your concerns.  What are the benefits of participating?  Participating in a focus group may increase your awareness and insight into gender socialization. In addition, you may be informed of additional resources and supports for men in distress. Your participation will help provide data about the experience of college men, informing future programming and psychotherapeutic efforts.  How will your identity be protected? Protecting your identity is important to us. The present research study has been approved by the UBC Behavioural Ethics Board (BREB) and is in compliance with all its ethical requirements. Any forms containing personal identifiable information (i.e., consent form, honorarium form) will be kept in a locked cabinet in the office of the principal investigator. This information will be kept separate from the audio recording and resulting transcript. The audio recording will be kept on a password protected and encrypted on a computer owned by the principal investigator on the UBC campus. All data will only be accessible to the principal investigator and the co-investigator of the study. The demographics form and resulting transcript from the focus group will be identified only by code number and kept in a locked filing cabinet on the UBC campus. Subjects will not be identified by name in any reports of the completed study. Because this study uses a focus group to collect data, we encourage participants not to discuss the content of the focus group to people outside the group; however, we can’t control what participants do with the information discussed.  Will you be compensated for your taking part in this research study? For their research participation, each participant will receive a $20 gift card. In addition, participants will be entered in a draw to win one additional $30 gift card. You will be asked to sign an honorarium form confirming you have received your compensation. This form will be kept from the data resulting from the focus groups. See “How will your identify be protected?” section above.  Who can you contact if you have any questions about the study? 180  If you have any questions or concerns about what we are asking of you, please contact the principal Investigator at robinder.bedi@ubc.ca or the co-investigator at kumarrajeena@alumni.ubc.ca.  Who can you contact if you have complaints or concerns about the study? If you have any concerns or complaints about your rights as a research participant and/or your experiences while participating in this study, contact the Research Participant Complaint Line in the UBC Office of Research Ethics at 604-822-8598 or if long distance e-mail RSIL@ors.ubc.ca or call toll free 1-877-822-8598.    Taking part in this study is entirely up to you. You have the right to refuse to participate in this study. If you decide to take part, you may choose to pull out of the study at any time without giving a reason and without any penalty. Your signature below indicates that you have received a copy of this consent form for your own records. Your signature indicates that you consent to participate in this study.        I do not want to be contacted in the future for the purposes of a member check.    ___________________________________________________________ Participant Signature Date   _________________________________________________________ Printed Name of the Participant signing above          181  Appendix B - Advertisement for Recruitment  B.1 Recruitment Email, Western Washington University Dear Student, The men’s resiliency committee, an interdepartmental group of WWU staff and students, would like to invite you to attend focus groups we are holding with men at Western Washington University. Participating in this focus group will be a chance for you to share your thoughts and experiences of being a male-identified student at WWU, which will help to inform ways the university can meet the needs of male students. This conversation will focus on your experience of being a man and how you make choices to be resilient and overcome adversity at college.  The group will last approximately 1.5 hours, refreshments will be provided, and you will be entered in a raffle tow in a $10 iTunes gift card. These groups are part of an ongoing effort by Western Washington University to understand and support male students, and as such, you will sign an informed consent if you agree to take part in the conversation, and your identifying information will be protected.   This quarter, the focus groups are being held on:  November 7, 6:00 p.m. @ Fairhaven Stack 2 TV Lounge  November 12, 6:00 p.m. @ Edens Hall Conference Room (110)  November 14, 12:00 p.p. @ Viking Union Room 464  We hope you are interested in participating, and please visit the link below in order to sign-up:  http://www.wwu.edu/mensresiliency/focusgroups  For more information, please feel free to be in contact!  Brennan Gilbert, PsyD Licensed Psychologist  Counseling Center Western Washington University Office: (360) 650 – 3164 Brennan.gilbert@wwu.edu  182  B.2 Recruitment Poster, Western Washington University   183  B. 3 Recruitment Email, University of British Columbia Dear Students, A research project looking at how men understand themselves as men and how they envision their future self is recruiting self-identified men to participate in a focus group at the University of British Columbia. Participating in this focus group will be a chance for you to share your thoughts and experiences of being a male-identified student at UBC, which will help to inform programming efforts for men. This conversation will focus on your experience of being a man and how you envision your possible self.  The group will last approximately 1.5 hours and refreshments will be provided. For your participation, you will receive a $20 gift card and be entered to win one additional $30 gift card. You will sign an informed consent if you agree to take part in the conversation, and your identifying information will be protected.   The focus group is being held on:  [Add date & location]  If you are interested in participating please visit bedi.ecps.educ.ubc.ca for more information, or directly contact the co-investigator Rajeena Kumar at bedi.researchlab@ubc.ca               184  B. 4 Recruitment Poster, University of British Columbia    UBC MEN: WHO DO YOU WANT TO BE IN THE FUTURE?                        We are hosting a focus group with students who identify as men at UBC about their experiences as men and we need your help. Come be part of a conversation about masculinity in the 20th century!  [Add Time, Date, Location]   All participants will receive a $20 gift card and be entered into a raffle to win one $30 gift card. Refreshments will be provided.  For more information and to sign up please contact bedi.researchlab@ubc.ca    185  Appendix C – Demographics Questionnaire (The demographics questionnaire was administered using an iPad in Phase I. In Phase II, this information will be collected on paper forms).  Demographics Questionnaire  Participant code: ___________  Please answer the following questions:  1. Age: (please use a whole number) __________  2. Sexual Orientation: __________________________________  3. Race: _________________________________  4. Undergraduate or Graduate (circle one)  5. Year in school (e.g., 1st, 2nd): _________________      186  Appendix D – Focus Group Interview Schedules   D. 1 Phase I   Moderators have the flexibility of adding additional probes and follow up questions to fully explore the topic. Moderators may be flexible in the order of questions they as, as long they are within the major question topic.   1. What does being/identifying as a man/male mean to you? a. How does society define being a man differently from how you define it?  2. What do you think it means to be resilient? a. How does being able to bounce back fit? Being mindful? Vulnerable? Knowing self? Having hope for the future? The willingness to give up control sometimes? Being able to ‘break’ and be okay? b. When thinking about ‘resilience,’ what words or phrases come to mind about your life experiences as a male person?  3. Over your life as a male person, when are times you felt more or less able to handle difficult? a. In thinking about a time when you were more resilient, what do you think contributed? b. In thinking about a tie when you were less resilient, what do you think contributed?  4. How do you ask for help? To who? What is it that you want when you ask for help? a. Times that this has gone well? Not so well? b. What keeps you from asking for help when you need it? c. What types of supports do you use at Western? d. What types of support do you perceive to be missing (anything that would make being supportive easier for you?)  5. What kind of man do you want to be in the future? What helps you to become that man? a. What aspects of masculinity do you hope to continue? Discontinue? What do you hope to pass on? Role model for other men? Your children someday? b. What gets in the way of that?     187  D. 2 Phase II *Note that this interview schedule is tentative. Exact questions will be determined during the analysis of Phase I data (theoretical sampling). In other words, exact questions for subsequent rounds of data collection are impossible to create before the first phase of data analysis is complete. It is the analysis that generates the specific questions (or lack thereof). These possible questions are partially informed by my developing theoretical sensitivity to the concept of possible masculinities through my review of the literature on possible masculinities.   In addition to the following questions from Phase I (What kind of man do you want to be in the future? What helps you to become that man? What aspects of masculinity do you hope to continue? Discontinue? What do you hope to pass on? What do you hope to role model for other men? What do you hope to role model for your children someday? What gets in the way of what you want to pass on or role model?) the following questions will be asked:   1. What contributes (i.e., experiences, social interactions, values, etc.) to the kind of man you want to be in the future?  2. Do certain people (i.e., role models) contribute to who you want to be in the future?  3. Do certain inspirational stories contribute to who you want to be in the future?  4. Do certain characteristics (e.g., portrayed in fictional movies, novels, etc.) contribute to who you want to be in the future?  5. Is who you want to be in the future different than what you tell people you want to be like in the future?  6. Do you think that who you are as a man can change? What would make it change? Why would it stay the same?  7. What do you require to meet your developmental needs?  8.  What do we, as a community, need from men to foster community safety and health?      188  Appendix E – Resources for Participants   Resources UBC Student Services:  Wellness Centre https://students.ubc.ca/health/wellness-centre  Counselling Services https://students.ubc.ca/health/counselling-services  Student Health Centre https://students.ubc.ca/health/student-health-service  Thrive at UBC http://thrive.ubc.ca/help-support/wellbeing-resources/  Free UBC Counselling Clinics  http://ecps.educ.ubc.ca/free-counselling-centres/  UBC Scarfe Building 604-827-1523 New Westminster 604-525-6651 Crisis Support  1-800-SUICIDE (1-800-784-2433)  https://crisiscentre.bc.ca/  Men Specific Head’s Up Guys https://headsupguys.org  Men’s Health Research http://www.menshealthresearch.ubc.ca/  Helpful Websites Kelty Mental Health https://keltymentalhealth.ca/  Foundry BC https://foundrybc.ca/     189  Appendix F - Honorarium Form       Honorarium Form      For my research participation, I can confirm that I have received a $20 gift card.       ________________________        __________________________ __________________________ Printed Name    Signature    Date          Honorarium Form      For my research participation, I can confirm that I have received a $30 gift card.       ________________________        __________________________ __________________________ Printed Name    Signature    Date    190  Appendix G - Transcription Key  Abbreviations: - M: Moderator - P: Participant  Symbols and When to Use Symbol Usage Word Strong emphasis on underlined word/portion of word ? Question ! Exclamation - Speaker is interrupted or speech to cut off … Pause > 3 seconds  Notes: 1. Start transcription after ice-breakers, informed consent, etc. and end transcription with moderator formally ending focus group and thanking participants 2. Use font size 12, font style Times New Roman 3. Indicate participants with P1, P2, etc. to indicate each participant respectively 4. Indicate moderators with M1, M2, etc. to indicate each moderator respectively  5. Use initial(s) if personal names are disclosed in dialogue 6. No need to include most verbal prompts unless they are considered significant or part of communicated meaning 7. Number each line of transcription for ease of reference   Example: Date of Focus Group  Date of Transcription, Transcribed by (Insert Name) Focus Group # Date of Check, Checked by (Insert Name) 1. M1: What do you think about school? 2. P1: It is boring 3. P2: Well, it can be interesting 4. P1: I agree but- 5. P2: No I think this… 6. P1: Well what do you? 7. P2: I disagree! 8. M2: Let’s talk about friends   191  Appendix H - Additional Examples of Memoing  Additional Memo Example 1: Demonstrating the Development of Part C of EPMM following Research Supervision   Following my meeting with Rob & Owen two weeks ago, we spoke about the final part of the model, the part about possible masculinities. Terminology was important and discussing how using “possible” is better than using “future,” as it implies something that already happened in the future, whereas possible is just that, a possibility. I think this is accurate and what I had intentionally meant. Rob spoke about how in the third part of the model, it would be difficult to use the example that came up as something that could apply to all men. Instead, Owen suggested abstracting back one step. So instead of talking about how men want to be “providers” in the future, we could abstract that into a “role.” This way, the examples can be just that, examples. And the model could fit into the other models that are already out there. What the model is aiming to do now, is connect other models? So, the first part is about masculinity (currently), which there is a lot of research on. The middle part of the model organizes the forces that contribute to masculinity (possible masculinity), and the final part are the aspects of possible masculinity. I think before re-coding the possible masculinity parts, it would be good to go back into the literature to familiarize myself with the models out there, and the models about the “aspects of gender/masculinity,” so I have a starting point. Second, I will need to go back into all my “possible masculinity” codes in NVivo and read them much closer to ascertain which aspect of the masculinity they are talking about. I think for the first round of coding, I did read closely enough about how the men were talking about the aspects. In other words, I may have abstracted too much then. With this in mind, I will go through the literature and codes again, and note my memos as I go.  192  Here is a list of the aspects that were suggested: Roles, Schemas, Identities, Ideologies, Norms, Biology. This is the list I have come up with after going through the literature again: Roles, Ideologies, Characteristics/traits (Physical, Personality/Emotional), (Social) behaviours (Sexual/reproductive behaviours/strategies), Relationships (Friends, Family, Spouse/Sexual, Community), Motivations/goals, Responsibilities, Beliefs/Schemas, Ideals, Values, Experiences (for example, the experience of travelling), Identity, Biological, Psychosocial, Expectations, Attitudes, Stereotypes, Health/biology, Goals  I decided to just see what the definitions of these concepts are: Cognitive (Thoughts, Beliefs, Values, Knowledge, Decisions, Problem solving, Attention, Memory, Evaluation/reasoning/problem solving, Self-evaluation, Identity), Emotional, Behavioural (Relationships, Interpersonal relationships, Friends, Family, Spouse/Sexual, Community, Unconscious, Gender role transitions, Intrapersonal).  Additional Memo Example 2: Coming up with Critical Incidents I have read through the codes several times, and have started to categorize them, but there are few examples that are…more striking to me, than the others. There have been a few examples where participants have very clearly called up a specific memory or events that led to them defining what kind of man they want to be in the future. Yes, there are examples where they will say, as I was growing up, my father was like this, and I want to be the opposite, but these appear like more gradual processes. There was this one example of a man calling up a memory of something his grandfather told him, and he recalled it again when he experienced a riot. He once again recalled this specific information in the focus groups and used it for the rationale for his description of what kind of man he wanted to be in the future (FG 1, Nov 7, 2013, P1, Lines 26-32). There was another example where a man specifically called up an individual they used to 193  know, and how their experience with them was really impactful. 2. FG 3, Mar 6, 2014, Lines 65-70). There is something about these examples they used that makes them different from just the typical examples. Maybe they should be categorized as their own group. Maybe called memorable moments. Or especially memorial moments. Maybe critical? Whatever they are, they really contributed to the way a man thought about himself in the future in a more direct way, rather than gradual.  Additional Memo Example 3: Catching Personal Biases During Analysis  This group is really focusing on how the liberal environment is shaping their experience. They seem to be defining what it means to be a man, in less extreme ways. They acknowledge the stereotypes but don’t adhere to them. It is different than the other transcripts I’ve read so far. It makes me think of words like, progressive, but I am also finding myself happy that these individuals are having a more balanced view on gender roles, so I need to make sure I am acknowledging my liberal nature and try to not let it colour my coding. I can see it limiting the variation in my coding, so I will try to capture all sides, and not just the extremes, the nuanced too.         194  Appendix I - Screenshots of Analysis Tool: NVivo               195  Appendix J - Screenshots of Analysis Tool: Excel Spreadsheet              196  Appendix K - Screenshot of Analysis Tool: Physical Paper Cards     197  Appendix L – Additional Examples for the EPMM L. 1 Additional Examples for Part B    Below are additional examples substantiating the various aspects of Part II of the EPMM.  Additional Individual Example Participant 2 from Focus Group 6 demonstrated the individual characteristic of exercising his critical thinking skills: “I watch a lot of Dr. Phil so they seem to perceive the man as the one who are being violent and the ones that beat up your wife and the ones that you know are doing the bad things and they’re the ones that need help ‘cause they’re so aggressive and what no and I really don’t think that’s always the case, and I think everything you know a lot of this is biased because you don’t look at the full picture but I do think there are a lot of good men out there who you know, they really care about their role as being even a husband and being you know having good leadership skills…” Additional Microsystem Examples  The impact of a religion or religious community was illustrated by Participant 2 from Focus Group 6: “…it’s you’re either a man or a girl. You either have a penis or you don’t have a penis. So, as I said, there are some gender confusions that are happening within people. As for what he said about being you know, savvy or you know being this kinda sexual person, that’s not really the intention for what a man’s to be but coming from my conservative stand point. God created Adam to work and he created Eve to be a mother, to nurture, and to give birth to children. So as a man, I do believe our primary goal is to be the bread, the bread feeders, so the ones who, you know, they’re the ones who generate the income or the you know the main support when it comes to finances and a family versus a woman, who I think I mean it’s not bad 198  for women to go out in the world but you know, usually a women’s primary goal is to be the care taker you know giving the love and support for a family.” Additional Mesosystem Example  Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 discussed how the interaction between his peers and how they shape his behaviours on campus in relation to women: “…hooking up with girls is another huge issue that men face on campus. If you are going your whole college career as a virgin your friends notice it and they push you constantly to like go talk to women and putting you in really uncomfortable situations. Where you’re talking to a girl and even she feels uncomfortable for that.” Additional Exosystem Examples  Participant 7 from Focus Group 4 speaks how more indirect forces (i.e., friend’s fathers) impacted his ideas on gender identity: “I remember there were a few stable figures kinda in my community, coming from a smaller area, that just kind like friend’s dads or whatever. You know people that had jobs and provided for their family but were able and willing to take the extra step for something that maybe they weren’t responsible for, you know. Maybe, yeah that’s what I want I just kinda want to be that guy that people know they can count on. I think that’s I think that’s like what I ultimately being a man for me is.” Additional Macrosystem Examples  In the data, there were copious examples of how the macrosystem impacted college age men’s ideas of masculinity. Participant 3 from Focus Group comments on the impact of mass media: “Well they have this, very strong man and he only wears he only wears a bath towel in all of these ads usually and he talks in a very deep voice and talks about what it means to be a man and you know this could be you but you’re not me and all these things about wearing old spice 199  and things like that. And he does all these supposedly manly things…these extreme things he can do, jus easily…He’s like on a motorcycle the whole time in one ad while he’s doing all these amazing things.”  Participant 2 from Focus Group 7 discusses how historical events impact his thoughts and behaviours about attending forums where men’s voices are front and center: “I was heavily involved in student caucuses at HCC and I I would go to like three or four discussion groups, a week and there was one, one I just never went to that was like men’s voices and I just I never felt like I wanted to go to that. It just, yeah, it’s a it’s a brand that has, a a, I don’t want to say a stigma to it but like baggage. Like men’s solidarity it, it just has been misused for so long that, I’m hesitant to go towards something that identifies in that way.” Additional Chronosystem Example  Participant 1 from Focus Group 1 offers an example of time and certain behaviours may be more acceptable according to society during a particular developmental period: “I feel like in college we have this mindset, I have four years to get as drunk and laid as possible and then as soon as I’m done with college, I have to like, actually start a real life and can’t be doing this anymore.” Additional Critical Incident Example Participant 3 from Focus Group 1 commented on a memorable event when he was in his first that made him reflect on his gender identify: “one of the craziest things that I noticed my first year here is there were a couple of guys on my floor who wore purity rings when they first arrived and everyone on my floor kind of joked about it…and then both of them ended up losing their virginities and took of their…rings and everyone kind of applauded them. But I was kind of like, you know that takes a lot of guys to come to college and life have that. Neither one of them 200  were really happy about losing their virginities and were really kind of devastated and shook up about it…I made a comment to my friend like hey man are you sure that you’re okay. And he immediately was like I feel so wrong for doing this. It was weird seeing how he just kind of sold out his beliefs to fit in with the crowd.”                   201  L. 2 Additional Examples for Part C Additional Internal Domain Examples  Participant 2 from Focus Group 8 commented the BVA of self-sufficiency: “I feel like I definitely want to be like financially independent I suppose. I’d rather be dependable than have to go to someone for anything because I don’t want to owe anything to people and I don’t want to feel.”  Participant 1 from Focus Group 2 stated the importance for them to carry on the BVA of being rational: “But I do want to carry some masculine traits with me as I get older the ones I think are positive like my ability to be rational and keep my emotions out of things when I need to and be that stoic strong person in a dire situation and not freak out.”  Participant 1 from Focus Group 7 reported his desire to have a certain physicality in the future: “I may like to be physically buff as well.”  Additional External Domain Examples  Men in the study group provided several examples for their desire to contribute to other’s well-being and contribute to the community. Participant 4 from Focus Group 3 commented: “I want to be able to fulfil my duties, I guess. Like whatever I choose for myself and whatever I make important to myself I would want to be the type of man who can make sure that I could do those things that I set out to…And how [the Greek’s] concept of manliness was the only way to win manliness was to go to battle. It was not winning it was not losing. It was you fulfilled our duty to like your community. And that’s what I personally think I want to be able to do to just fulfill my commitment and just rise to the occasions I guess.” Further Participant 8 from Focus Group 4 stated: “The main thing is I wanna make a difference in what I’m doing. It doesn’t have 202  to be an easy thing or necessarily a fun thing, but if I’m changing other people’s lives and making them better, then I would say it’s worth it. And I would get joy out of that” Participant 3 from Focus Group 1 specifically commented on his hope to find a romantic partner in the future (role = romantic partner): “Finding a person that you love,  you know and sticking with that person I think that, I think that bring out the best in most men, so.”                   203  Appendix M – External Audits  Two separate external audits occurred on the present study. The audits together examined the process and outcome of the present study to evaluate whether the findings, interpretations and conclusions were supported by the data and readily connected to what the participants said, as judged by an outsider observer. Audit 1 occurred in February 2020 by a female counselling psychology graduate student and had no previous connections to the present research. This auditor had completed coursework in qualitative research and has been involved in qualitative research. The auditor was given the methodology section of the present researcher to review given her background in qualitative researcher and given the instruction to determine if the methodology was in line with Straussian grounded theory methodology. The auditor was also given access to the de-identified transcripts of the focus groups and a summary of the EPMM and given the instruction to determine if the resulting model captures what the participants were speaking about in the focus groups to a reasonable degree. Audit 2 occurred in February 2020 by a male research assistant who worked in the lab that the researcher worked in and had no previous connections to the present research. The auditor was given access to the de-identified transcripts of the focus groups and a summary of the EPMM and given the instruction to determine if the resulting model captures what the participants were speaking about in the focus groups to a reasonable degree. Auditor 1’s Comment on Methodology:  Below are my comments. Note that all of the comments are based on what I read in the Kenny & Fourie article. 204  - "Codes will be compared with codes and with emergent categories. Categories will be compared with each other, and the resulting emerging theory (composed of these categories) will be compared with literature " o The memo writing section, I think, it's not completely in line with the description because in your thesis memo writing sounds like just reflecting on the process of analyzing the data. Whereas the description in the article makes it sound much more systematic where there's memoing as each line is being coded - Not sure if you talked about this and I just didn't pick it up or if it wasn't included on purpose but page 6 of Kenny & Fourie, talks about the properties being placed on "continuum… giving each category complex dimensional profile", this wasn't talked about in your proposal which I thought was an important aspect of open coding. - For selective coding, you wrote what you would do in a sequential order with the core category, but it looks like to me that the 5 steps don't need to be in a certain order. Isn't deciding the order before actually seeing the codes kind of against what GT stands for?  Let me know if you have any questions. How the Researcher Addressed Auditor 1’s Comments on Methodology:   Regarding the first comment, the researcher consulted their second committee member (methodology expert in grounded theory) regarding memo use and altered the description in the thesis. Memoing was used both during line by line coding (open coding) and for general reflections during the research process. Regarding the second comment, the researcher went back to re-write and more clearly demonstrate the properties and dimensions of the EPMM in Chapters 3 and 4. Regarding the last comment, the researcher consulted her second committee member (methodology expert in grounded theory) to discuss the definition of selective coding. In 205  this discussion is the determined that the description of selective coding in previous drafts was incorrect and the description given. Further, Kenny and Fourie’s (2015) article was critiqued by the committee member in its description of what selective coding is. Thus, the researcher went back and re-wrote the section on selective coding so that it more accurately reflects what the researcher did and what the actual definition of selective coding is.  Auditor 1’s Comment on Outcome:  I have read through the transcripts and looking over your overall model (section 4.1 of your thesis). What you have laid out in your EPMM fits well with what was said by participants in the focus groups.  What participants valued and saw as important characteristics of themselves definitely was significant and influenced how they envisioned their future masculinities. The experiences at the individual to macro level were evident in what the participants talked about and how these experiences influenced how they envisioned their future masculine self. How the Researcher Addressed Auditor 1’s Comments on Outcome:  There were no comments that the researcher needed to address.   Auditor 2’s Comment on Outcome:  It seems to me like your model corresponds quite well to what your participants were speaking about. The various levels of the bioecological theory in part B all seem to be present in the data; incorporating its terminology seems fitting. I wasn't certain as to the rationale for incorporating critical incidents as a component; there are lots of pieces to the model so I hope you get some mileage out of it to justify its role. However, it seems valid; critical incidents clearly are stated and shaped the men's perspectives. Part C's two categories - the internal and 206  external domains of possible masculinities make sense to me as an appropriate distinction, and both are well represented in the data. Another thought I had was that at least as far as parts B and C, nothing structural in the model seems very particular to masculinity. It seems like it could probably apply to a lot of other cases of identity development. Admittedly your data are from masculinity, and the particular aspirations mentioned in part C could reasonably be expected to differ for a different identity. How the Researcher Addressed Auditor 2’s Comments on Outcome:  Comments related to parts B and C of the model not seeming particular to masculinity was addressed by adding and relating major theories of identity development and self-concept/self-knowledge to the EPMM as a way to situate the EPMM outside the field of masculinity specifically.    

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.24.1-0389782/manifest

Comment

Related Items