The Association Between Bullying and Physical Health Among Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research suggests that lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) populations experience higher prevalence of school bullying than heterosexuals. OBJECTIVES: We examined if (a) verbal versus physical bullying were differentially associated with physical health among sexual minorities and (b) if sexual identity (i.e., homosexual [i.e., lesbian/gay] vs. bisexual) moderated the association of bullying on physical health. DESIGN: LGB adults aged 18 to 66 years (n = 463) were recruited online. Participants reported high school experiences of verbal and physical bullying and physician-diagnosed health conditions. RESULTS: Physical and verbal bullying were related to physical health conditions (ps < .01). Physical bullying had a significant negative impact on physical health for bisexual persons (p < .001) but not for gay/lesbian persons. CONCLUSIONS: Experiencing bullying in high school was associated with physical health problems in adulthood. Bullying had a different relationship with health problems for bisexually identified individuals compared to lesbian/gay individuals. Future research should strive to disentangle potential differences in the relationship between bullying and health within sexual minority groups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".