The LGBQ Social Climate Matters: Policies, Protests, and Placards and Psychological Well-Being Among LGBQ Emerging Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual minority youth, including emerging adults, are at risk for negative health outcomes. Minority stress theory posits that heterosexism can contribute to these outcomes among sexual minorities. Researchers have tested this theory with respect to interpersonal heterosexism; however, little attention has been given to macro-level and environmental forms of heterosexism, especially among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) youth. In this study, we examine the role of objective social climate (LGB state-level policies) and experiential distal and proximal environmental microaggressions on the psychological well-being of LGBQ emerging adults. Furthermore, we examine the role of LGBQ identity salience as a moderating factor on the macro/environmental-heterosexism and well-being relationship. Multivariable linear regression results suggest that living in a state without same-sex marriage laws is associated with greater self-esteem, whereas both distal and proximal environmental microaggressions are risk factors for anxiety and perceived stress. Furthermore, identity salience can ameliorate the effects of distal microaggressions and intensify the effects of proximal microaggressions and same-sex marriage legislation. Implications for practice with sexual minority youth 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".