MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179072345 · doi:10.1177/07067437211030498

“Conversion Therapy” Experiences in Their Social Contexts: A Qualitative Study of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression Change Efforts in Canada

2021· article· en· W3179072345 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David J. Kinitz, Trevor Goodyear, Élisabeth Dromer, Dionne Gesink, Olivier Ferlatte, Rod Knight, Travis Salway

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalBC Centre for Disease ControlPublic Health OntarioUniversity of British ColumbiaBritish Columbia Centre on Substance Use
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsPsychologySexual orientationQualitative researchPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)DenialGrounded theorySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistSociologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe in what forms, with whom, where, when, and why Canadians experience sexual orientation and gender identity and expression change efforts (SOGIECE). METHODS: This qualitative study is grounded in a transformative paradigm. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 22 adults recruited from across Canada who have experienced "conversion therapy." Directed content analysis was used, employing deductive and inductive coding approaches, to synthesize the findings and address 5 policy-relevant questions. RESULTS: What are SOGIECE? Formal and informal methods of SOGIECE were used, including pharmacologic interventions, denial of gender-affirming care, and coaching to repress sexual orientation and/or gender identity and expression. With whom did SOGIECE occur? Practitioners included religious leaders, licenced health-care professionals (e.g., psychiatrists and psychologists), peers, and family members. Where did SOGIECE occur? SOGIECE occurred in 3 predominant settings: faith-based, health care, and social life. When did SOGIECE occur? SOGIECE rarely occurred over a restricted time frame; often, SOGIECE began while participants were adolescents or young adults and continued multiple years under various forms. Others described SOGIECE as a context in which their life was embedded for many years. Why did people attend SOGIECE? Cisheteronormative social and religious expectations taught participants that being non-cisgender or non-heterosexual was incompatible with living a good and respectable life. CONCLUSIONS: SOGIECE are not a circumscribed set of practices. Our study shows that SOGIECE are a larger phenomenon that consists of intentional and explicit change efforts as well as heterosexual- and cisgender-dominant social norms expressed and enforced across a wide range of settings and circumstances. This study provides critical context to inform contemporary social and health policy responses to SOGIECE. Policies should account for the overt, covert, and insidious ways that SOGIECE operate in order to effectively promote safety, equity, and health for sexually diverse and gender-diverse people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207