Table of Contents
Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale
Here in this post, we are sharing the “Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale”. You can read psychometric and Author information. We have thousands of Scales and questionnaires in our collection (See Scales and Questionnaires). You can demand us any scale and questionnaires related to psychology through our community, and we will provide you with a short time. Keep visiting Psychology Roots.
About Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale
Scale Name
Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale
Author Details
Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis and Shanna H.M. van Goozen
Translation Availability
Not Sure
Background/Description
The Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale (UGDS) occupies a significant space in the realm of understanding and assessing gender dysphoria. Here’s a breakdown of its background and introduction in several paragraphs:
Origins in the Mid-1990s:
- Developed by Dutch researchers Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis and Shanna H.M. van Goozen at the VU University Medical Center in Amsterdam.
- Aimed to assess gender dysphoria in the first cohort of transgender adolescents receiving early medical intervention with puberty blockers.
- Initial version comprised 12 items, with separate versions for individuals assigned male and female at birth.
Key Focus:
- Evaluates thoughts and feelings concerning gender identity and expression.
- Measures distress related to gender incongruence, including:
- Dissatisfaction with assigned sex at birth.
- Discomfort with gender expression and social roles.
- Social dysphoria arising from interactions and pronoun usage.
Impact and Recognition:
- Gained widespread adoption over the years, translated into numerous languages.
- Recognized for its:
- Sensitivity and specificity: accurately identifying individuals with gender dysphoria.
- Ease of use: self-report questionnaire format simplifies administration.
- Clinical utility: aiding diagnosis, treatment planning, and monitoring progress.
Evolution and Inclusivity:
- Acknowledging limitations in representing non-binary identities, a revised version emerged in 2013: the UGDS-Gender Spectrum (UGDS-GS).
- Developed by a team including the original creators and researchers specializing in non-binary experiences.
- Offers 18 gender-neutral items, making it applicable to individuals of all gender identities.
Administration, Scoring and Interpretation
- Informed consent: Participants should understand the purpose of the assessment and provide informed consent before participating.
- Confidentiality: Ensure participant anonymity and data privacy, especially in research settings.
- Limitations: Remember, the UGDS and UGDS-GS are screening tools, not definitive diagnoses. A diagnosis of gender dysphoria requires comprehensive clinical evaluation.
Reliability and Validity
The Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale (UGDS) and its revised version, the UGDS-Gender Spectrum (UGDS-GS), have been extensively studied for their reliability and validity, making them valuable tools for assessing gender dysphoria. Here’s a summary of their strengths and limitations:
- Internal consistency: Both versions boast strong internal consistency, meaning individual items measure the same underlying construct (gender dysphoria). Cronbach’s alpha values typically range from 0.85 to 0.95, indicating excellent reliability.
- Test-retest reliability: Both scales demonstrate moderate to good test-retest reliability, meaning scores remain relatively stable over time when participants retake the scale. However, this can be influenced by changes in gender dysphoria itself.
- Content validity: Both versions cover relevant aspects of gender dysphoria, including dissatisfaction with assigned sex, discomfort with gender expression, and social dysphoria. This suggests they measure what they intend to.
- Concurrent validity: Scores on both scales correlate with other measures of gender dysphoria, supporting their ability to identify individuals experiencing dysphoria.
- Criterion validity: The UGDS shows good ability to distinguish between transgender individuals and cisgender controls. The UGDS-GS, as it is gender-neutral, is designed for research rather than diagnosis and lacks established cut-off scores for clinical use.
Limitations:
- Self-report bias: As self-report measures, both scales are susceptible to response bias, meaning participants may intentionally or unintentionally answer in ways that present themselves in a specific light.
- Limited generalizability: Both scales have been primarily validated in Western, clinical populations. Their applicability to diverse populations requires further research.
- Not diagnostic tools: Scores alone cannot diagnose gender dysphoria. Professional evaluation and comprehensive assessment are crucial for diagnosis.
Available Versions
12-Items
Reference
McGuire, J. K., Berg, D., Catalpa, J. M., Morrow, Q. J., Fish, J. N., Nic Rider, G., … & Spencer, K. (2020). Utrecht Gender Dysphoria Scale-Gender Spectrum (UGDS-GS): construct validity among transgender, nonbinary, and LGBQ samples. International Journal of Transgender Health, 21(2), 194-208.
McGuire, J. K., Rider, G. N., Catalpa, J. M., Steensma, T. D., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., & Berg, D. R. (2019). Utrecht gender dysphoria scale-gender spectrum. In Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 359-362). Taylor and Francis.
Important Link
Scale File:
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the UGDS and UGDS-GS?
The UGDS and UGDS-GS are self-report questionnaires used to assess gender dysphoria in adults and adolescents.
What do they measure?
They measure thoughts, feelings, and distress related to gender identity and expression, including dissatisfaction with assigned sex, discomfort with gender expression, and social dysphoria.
Are they diagnostic tools?
No, they are screening tools and cannot diagnose gender dysphoria alone. A qualified mental health professional is needed for diagnosis.
Who can administer them?
Ideally, qualified mental health professionals trained in gender identity and dysphoria. Researchers may also use them in approved protocols.
When was it developed?
1997 by Dutch researchers P.T. Cohen-Kettenis and S.H.M. van Goozen.
What are its versions?
Separate versions for individuals assigned male and female at birth.
Are they reliable and valid?
Yes, but limitations exist, such as self-report bias and limited generalizability.
What resources discuss their reliability and validity?
Refer to publications and websites mentioned in previous responses.
Disclaimer
Please note that Psychology Roots does not have the right to grant permission for the use of any psychological scales or assessments listed on its website. To use any scale or assessment, you must obtain permission directly from the author or translator of the tool. Psychology Roots provides information about various tools and their administration procedures, but it is your responsibility to obtain proper permissions before using any scale or assessment. If you need further information about an author’s contact details, please submit a query to the Psychology Roots team.
Help Us Improve This Article
Have you discovered an inaccuracy? We put out great effort to give accurate and scientifically trustworthy information to our readers. Please notify us if you discover any typographical or grammatical errors.
Make a comment. We acknowledge and appreciate your efforts.
If you have any scale or any material related to psychology kindly share it with us at psychologyroots@gmail.com. We help others on behalf of you.
