On Gender and Equality

The final survey questionnaire, contained in the Appendix, contains items divided into three sections - policy items, belief items, and moral items. participants rated the extent to which they agreed with each of the items on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0 was described as “Strongly Agree,'” 1 was “Moderately Agree,” 2 was “Neutral,” 3 was “Moderately disagree,” and 4 was “Strongly Disagree.” Most policy items were of three types, all concerned with distribution of goods or burdens between males and females: equality items held that males and females should be treated the same or should do the same things; status-quo items supported current inequality. Some policy items did not concern distribution but, rather, relations between males and females or rules of etiquette. There were, in all, 30 policy items, 20 belief items and 10 moral items, making a total of 60 items. In addition, all participants were asked a series of demographic questions: age, gender, level of education, profession, religion, strength of religious beliefs, and economic background.

Factor analyses supported the formation of three subscales of the policy items: Equality consisting of gender equality and gender segregation items (the latter with negative loadings); Belief and Moral items, however, were formed in a similarly singular, containing statements in the form . The items used (and the direction of their scoring, when different within a scale) are shown in the Appendix with letters indicating the scales in question. Reliabilities (alpha) of the scales in the questionnaire were tested, results for which are shown respectively: Equal, 0.853; Transformative, 0.563; Segregate, 0.574; Belief, 0.806; Moral, 0.623. As predicted, the scales with more items were found more reliable.

Research ethical standards were followed throughout the study. For example, the researcher informed all of the participants that the research was voluntary, confidential and anonymous in the statement they signed before they were surveyed and interviewed. They were informed that the interview involved voice recording. With regards to anonymity, the researcher ensured that all identifiable markers were removed from the transcribed materials. Signed informed consent forms and details of participants were kept separately from the transcribed material. All of the documents relating to this research study were kept under lock and key.

The study used data from the BBS, BDHS and UNFPA, all of which was already ethically approved for research purpose. The BDHS Program followed several special precautions and maintains strict standards to protect the privacy and well-being of household members in all BDHS surveys; in the informed consent statement, it has been emphasized that ‘participation is voluntary´ and protocol ensures that neither the individual nor the household can be identified (BDHS, 2015). Each respondent is identified only by a series of numbers, and after data processing, questionnaire cover sheets containing these identifier numbers are destroyed, and some of the insignificant information about respondents are randomly assigned. 

Cite this page