The Dynamic Identity Formation of Sexual Minority Adolescents: A Constructivist Grounded Theory of Adversity and Resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".