Adolescent male emotionality: a mixed methods investigation into the complexities of 'being male' based upon varying levels of emotional restriction

Abstract

Males’ rigid adherence to masculine norms (e.g., emotional restriction, self-reliance, toughness) is frequently implicated in many concerning intrapersonal and interpersonal-related outcomes (e.g., suicide, delinquency, violence). The pressure to adhere to masculine norms often increases during adolescence, as do many of the concerning outcomes involving males. To better understand and support adolescent males in these social and emotional-related issues, this study had four objectives based upon significant knowledge gaps. These objectives were: (a) to be positive-focused and prioritize adolescent males’ own perspectives of their experiences; (b) to prise apart the complexities of masculine norm adherence and resistance; (c) to detail the specifics of adolescent males’ relationships with emotional expression; and (d) to assess the epistemological and practical efficacy of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in masculinities research.

This study implemented a novel mixed methods research design guided by the question: To what extent do adolescent males’ experiences and beliefs of being male vary, based on differing levels of emotional restriction? To answer this, male students (N = 170, aged 17–19) from a school district in British Columbia, Canada, completed a screening tool, consisting of the Normative Male Alexithymia Scale-Brief Form (NMAS-BF) and a written component, to determine their relative levels of emotional restriction. Using a hermeneutic phenomenological approach, the 10 least and 10 most emotionally restricted participants were interviewed regarding their experiences and beliefs of being male. Afterwards, themes were compared between the two participant groups. All 170 participants also completed the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory-46 (CMNI-46) to measure their adherence to eight masculine norms. Statistical analyses were conducted between these and the NMAS-BF scores to further answer this research question.

To inform the extent to which the interview and statistical findings could be integrated, it was first necessary to analyze the congruency of the data, which was guided by the question: To what extent are adolescent males’ experiences and beliefs of being male aligned across survey and interview findings? This alignment analysis, between participants’ CMNI-46 and interview responses, indicated that the level of congruency between data sets varied depending on which masculine norm was discussed. Most data were more aligned than not, but there was cause for considerable caution when drawing conclusions from several CMNI-46 subscales due to their conceptual vagueness and/or lack of relevance in adolescent males’ lives. As this was believed to be the first alignment analysis in masculinities research, further alignment analyses are recommended; however, this study provides initial support that quantitative and qualitative methods measuring masculine-related phenomena can be epistemologically compatible. Concerns and practical recommendations for doing so are discussed.

In answering the primary research question, integrated results presented a deepened awareness of the complex, ongoing, and contextual nature of masculine norm adherence and resistance. Less emotionally restricted participants tended to resist more masculine norms and did so more consistently, especially regarding the norms of emotional restriction and self-reliance. Despite this, adherence to multiple norms on the CMNI-46 were more similar across all participants than expected. Both adherence and resistance to masculine norms were strategic for participants and motivated primarily by the desire to connect to others or to connect to oneself, respectively. Although some participants willingly adhered to masculine norms others did so reluctantly. Confidence was a key factor for participants who were able to resist masculine norms; often aligning, or even adhering to some masculine norms, acted as a buffer to help resist others. As such, both adherence and resistance brought tangible benefits as well as associated costs to participants. By late adolescence, the costs for those who were more emotionally restricted appeared greater in terms of feelings of loneliness and feeling stuck regarding their emotionality. Reasons are outlined as to why some adolescent males suppress their feelings while others do not. Overall, participants’ relationship with emotional expression was a defining aspect of their experiences of being adolescent males; yet this study challenges the assumption that adolescent males are not highly aware of their inner emotional experiences or that being more emotional expressive is automatically better than not. Implications for better supporting adolescent males’ social and emotional wellbeing in schools and in other contexts are provided. Limitations and future areas of research are also discussed.