Not all one and the same: Sexual identity, activism, and collective self-esteem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines important distinctions in sexual orientation identities by exploring the relationships among sexual identity, activism, and collective self-esteem. Past research has revealed that individuals who label themselves as belonging to certain minority sexual identities may experience different types of outcomes; for instance, bisexual individuals have been shown to experience more psychological hardships (Brewster & Moradi, 2010; Browne & Lim, 2010), whereas Queer individuals' politicization may buffer against some of these negative experiences and increase their psychological well-being (Galinsky et al., 2013; Klar and Kasser, 2009; Riggs, 2010). We explored whether these important differences could be attributed to a person's choice of a sexual identity description. An online survey was distributed to Facebook groups affiliated with 33 universities across Canada, which yielded responses from 265 participants. Four distinct sexual identity categories were created and compared in two multiple regression models that controlled for measures of personal and social identity. In the first model, we tested group differences in collective self-esteem and, in the second model, we assessed group differences in political activism. As predicted, collective self-esteem was significantly lower for those who identified as bisexual, and activism was most likely among those who identified as Queer. Our research highlights the need for caution when either measuring or studying aspects of sexual orientation, since these identity categories reflect different personal and political points of reference.
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 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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".