Double jeopardy: lesbians and the legacy of multiple stigmatised identities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Lesbian Internalized Homophobia Scale (LIHS, Szymanski & Chung, 2001) was developed to assess internalized homophobia in lesbians. Support for the psychometric properties of the scale have been found in studies with samples from the United States. The current study assessed the psychometric properties of the LIHS in a cross-cultural sample of 803 lesbians from 20 countries (MAge = 34.77 years, SD = 11.61) recruited via advertisements placed in e-groups, e-bulletin boards, and women’s press. Cross-cultural comparisons were examined on reported levels of internalised homophobia, and the psychosocial correlates of internalised misogyny, depression, self-esteem, psychosexual adjustment and homosexual identity formation. The current study also reports the development and psychometric properties of a new scale that measures internalised misogyny. It was hypothesised that the reliability of the LIHS and levels of internalised homophobia would differ by country as a result of variations in cultural manifestations of homophobia. Factorial analysis of the LIHS provided support for four of the five LIHS sub-scales. This shorter version of the LIHS demonstrated good reliability and validity in a multi-cultural sample and individually in samples from Australia, the United States, Canada, England and Finland. Cross-cultural comparison on levels of internalised homophobia demonstrated significant differences between countries with lesbians in Australia reporting the lowest levels and lesbians from England the highest. The results of this study have furthered the understanding of internalised homophobia and have provided empirical support for the theoretical proposition that a relationship exists between internalised misogyny and internalised homophobia. Results are discussed in terms of the implications for therapy with lesbian clients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".