Exploring the effect of gender role on suicide for men using the integrated motivational-volitional model of suicide

• Main Author: Bannister, Leanne R.
• Other Authors: Gleeson, Kate
• Published: University of Surrey 2018
• Subjects: 150
• Online Access: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.759511

Aim: For many years suicide rates have been higher for men than women and research has failed to explain this difference. More recently, the effect of gender role has been explored and offers a promising explanation, although the nature of this effect remains unclear. This study aimed to incorporate gender role into a well-established model of suicide (The Integrated Motivational-Volitional (IMV) model) (O’Connor, 2011). More specifically the present study tested whether two variables related to gender role moderated the relationship between defeat and entrapment in the IMV model. These variables were Gender Role Conflict (GRC), measured using the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) and Androgyny, measured using the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). Design: A cross-sectional design was utilised and participants completed anonymous online self-report surveys. The independent variable was defeat and the dependent variable was entrapment. Existing moderator variables outlined in the IMV model were rumination and coping flexibility. GRC and androgyny were tested as potential new moderators. General linear modelling was used to examine the moderating effect of the 4 variables. Participants: 231 men over the age of 18 completed the online survey. The majority of participants were White-British men in full-time employment. Results: Coping flexibility and rumination when entered jointly into the model were found to moderate the relationship between defeat and entrapment, with higher levels of rumination and lower levels of coping flexibility strengthening the relationship. This model explained 67% of the variance in entrapment scores. GRC and Androgyny were not significant moderators, however higher levels of GRC were correlated with higher level of defeat and entrapment. Conclusions: The clinical implications are discussed in relation to the clinician’s role in supporting men to identify patterns of rumination and adopt a more flexible approach to coping with defeat. Recommendations for future research are discussed.