MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964769498 · doi:10.1080/1550428x.2012.677232

Disclosure of Sexual Orientation and Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Youths’ Adjustment: Associations with Past and Current Parental Acceptance and Rejection

2012· article· en· W1964769498 on OpenAlexaff
Émilie D’Amico, Danielle Julien

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of GLBT Family Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianSexual orientationPsychologySexual minorityDevelopmental psychologyAlcohol consumptionSexual identityClinical psychologyTransgenderAlcoholSocial psychologyHuman sexualityGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One hundred eleven self-identified gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) youths who had disclosed sexual orientation to parents and 53 GLB youths who had not disclosed to parents participated in a study that examined (1) the associations between parent-child relationship quality in childhood to GLB youths’ coming out; (2) the associations between GLB youths’ coming out to parents, on the one hand, and GLB youths’ identity and psychological maladjustment, and alcohol and drug consumption, on the other hand; and (3) the unique associations between past and current family relationship characteristics and GLB youths’ current identity and psychological adjustment, and alcohol and drug consumption. Results showed that, compared to undisclosed youths, disclosed youths reported higher levels of acceptance from their mothers and fathers in childhood, and lower levels of rejection by fathers in childhood. Also, as compared to undisclosed youths, a smaller proportion of disclosed youths reported they had engaged in alcohol and drug consumption behaviors. Among disclosed youths, past and current parental acceptance and rejection accounted for unique variance of youths’ current identity and psychological maladjustment, whereas current rejection of sexual orientation accounted for unique variance of current youths’ alcohol and drug consumption. Research and clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations93
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GLBT Family StudiesSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207