MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410893744 · doi:10.1080/00918369.2025.2493150

The Dynamic Identity Formation of Sexual Minority Adolescents: A Constructivist Grounded Theory of Adversity and Resilience

2025· article· en· W4410893744 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rebekah Amos, Ross G. White, Praveetha Patalay, Warren Donnellan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Homosexuality · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsConstructivist grounded theoryGrounded theoryPsychologySexual minoritySexual identityDevelopmental psychologyPsychological resilienceIdentity (music)Minority stressSocial psychologyHeterosexismSexual orientationLesbianGender studiesHuman sexualityQualitative researchSociologyPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sexual Minority Adolescents (SMAs) are more likely to experience mental health problems than heterosexual adolescents. This has been observed across geographical and socio-political contexts. Within the UK, minimal work has explored SMA's experience of navigating their sexuality and experiences of adversity and resilience. A constructivist grounded theory approach was adopted. Data were gathered in 2021, from 17 semi-structured interviews with a gender diverse sample aged 16-25. The Dynamic Identity Formation Sexual Minority (DIFS) theory was generated via analysis of participant narrative and informed by existing sociopsychological models (e.g. ecological systems theory). DIFS is a sociopsychological theory, with three tiers (cultures, enactment and experience). The cultures of heteronormativity and gender binarism, and the culture of queerness sit atop. Each culture is enacted by behaviors, i.e. othering and suppression. The final tier is individual experience, which can include internalized homonegativity and/or developing a commitment to supporting others. DIFS helps understand the discrete and interacting influence of sociological structures, interpersonal relationships and psychological experiences over developmental time. Thus, a more holistic and targeted intervention approach can be utilized by psychotherapists with this group. Extra inclusivity efforts towards non-heterosexual relationships are likely to be effective in variant settings, e.g. the education system.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HomosexualitySame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207