The Relationship Between Sexual Minority Stress and Sexual Satisfaction: A Meta-Analytic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite increased scholarly attention being paid to minority stress and sexual satisfaction among sexual minorities, to our knowledge, no researchers have attempted to systematically synthesize this literature. To address this omission, we conducted a meta-analytic review of the association between sexual minority stress (i.e. sexual identity stigma, internalized sexual identity stigma, and sexual identity concealment) and sexual satisfaction. Suitable studies were recruited through electronic databases, with article screening adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Twenty-eight articles containing 61 effect sizes were analyzed (N = 183,832). Findings indicated a small, inverse relationship between these constructs, indicating that minority stress may lead to diminished sexual satisfaction among gay/lesbian and bisexual individuals. Further, the overall effect size varied as a function of minority stress type, such that the effect for internalized stigma was significantly larger than the effects for sexual identity stigma or concealment. Age was also a significant moderator; specifically, older age was associated with a smaller effect, suggesting that older adults may be better than younger adults at coping with minority stress. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed. We also articulate the implications of these findings vis-à-vis the health and wellbeing of sexual minorities and suggest that clinicians should target internalized stigma in their treatment of sexual concerns among members of this population.
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 | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".