MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132916125

Lifetime and Daily Discrimination and Mental Health in Sexual and Gender Diverse Individuals: Examining Risk and Protective Factors

2021· dissertation· W7132916125 on OpenAlexaff
Natania Marcus

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2021
Typedissertation
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsEmployment and Social Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthMediationModerated mediationStressorNegative affectivitySexual abuseSocial supportPsychological resilienceStigma (botany)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, non-binary, queer, two-spirit, intersex, asexual and other sexual and gender diverse (LGBTQ+) individuals are at increased vulnerability to experience negative mental health outcomes compared to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. A large body of scholarly literature suggest that stigma (often in the form of discrimination) contributes to stressors that may account for the increased mental health burden in this population. The Psychological mediation framework (PMF) indicates that emotion regulation and social support may be important mechanisms leading from stigma to mental health outcomes. The objectives of the present studies were to evaluate and expand the PMF by testing the effects of stigma on mental health (i.e., affectivity and depression) through emotion regulation and social support, and to examine the moderating effects of several risk factors (i.e., childhood abuse history, attachment insecurity) and protective factors (i.e., self-compassion). Daily diary data was used in Study 1 while Study 2 used cross-sectional baseline data to carry out objectives. In Study 1, participants (n = 84) submitted 592 daily surveys for an average of 7 days, reporting on their discrimination experiences, social support, emotion regulation, daily affect, and several risk and protective factors. Moderated mediation models were examined using multilevel, conditional process modelling. It was found that both within-person and across-persons, daily discrimination was indirectly related to daily negative affectivity, via emotion dysregulation, but not social support. Childhood abuse history and self-compassion moderated the daily discrimination- emotion dysregulation relationship. In Study 2, conditional process modeling was used to test pathways from lifetime LGBTQ+ discrimination to depression via social support and emotion dysregulation, with attachment insecurity as a moderator using cross-sectional data from 117 LGBTQ+ individuals. As expected, lifetime LGBTQ+ discrimination had an indirect effect on depression, via social support, and this effect was moderated by attachment insecurity. Social support had a direct and indirect effect on depression, via emotion dysregulation. Emotion dysregulation and social support are important mechanisms leading from discrimination to mental health in LGBTQ+ individuals, and understanding specific risk and protective factors can help to inform case conceptualization and treatment planning for LGBTQ+ affirmative interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→