The buffering effect of peer support on the links between family rejection and psychosocial adjustment in LGB emerging adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) emerging adults often seek support from their peers if they lack support from their family of origin. We predicted that peer social support would moderate the link between negative family relationships and psychosocial adjustment, such that in the context of family rejection, experiencing more peer support would predict lower levels of anxiety, depression, and internalized homonegativity (IH) and higher self-esteem. Sixty-two (27 females) LGB individuals (ages 17–27, M = 21.34 years, SD = 2.65) reported on their families’ attitudes toward homosexuality, experiences of family victimization, peer social support, anxiety and depression symptoms, IH, and self-esteem. Results showed that peer social support moderated the link between negative family attitudes and anxiety and also moderated the link between family victimization and depression. The moderating effects suggest that having a supportive peer group may protect against mental health problems for LGB emerging adults who lack support from their family of origin.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".