Identity, minority stress and psychological well-being among gay men and lesbians
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to gay-related discrimination, perceived stigma or other stressors is associated with poorer mental health for gay and lesbian individuals. Yet not all gay men and lesbians experience the same levels or types of stressors, nor do they react the same in response to stress exposure. Using a sample of self-identified gay and lesbian individuals who completed an online survey, this research examined whether social identity, specifically a sense of belonging to the lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) community, predicted both exposure and reactivity to gay-related stress. Results showed that those who were higher in gay identity reported significantly more discrimination but significantly less perceived stigma than those who were lower in gay identity. Although gay identity was not associated with reactivity to discrimination, it was associated with reactivity to perceived stigma. Those who were lower in gay identity reported significantly more depressive symptoms when they experienced high levels of perceived stigma than when they experienced low levels of perceived stigma. In contrast, those who were higher in gay identity were buffered against the negative consequences of perceived stigma; there were no differences in reported depression based on the experiences of perceived stigma. The theoretical and practical implications of these data 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it