Not Like Everybody Else but We're the Same: Psychosocial Variables Compared Across Diverse Sexual and Gender Identities.

IF 5 1区 心理学 Q1 Psychology Journal of Personality Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI:10.1111/jopy.12989
Eleanor J Junkins, Brian G Ogolsky, Jaime Derringer
{"title":"Not Like Everybody Else but We're the Same: Psychosocial Variables Compared Across Diverse Sexual and Gender Identities.","authors":"Eleanor J Junkins, Brian G Ogolsky, Jaime Derringer","doi":"10.1111/jopy.12989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people are underrepresented in psychological research. Part of the underrepresentation of SGM people likely stems from potential participants' unwillingness to join a study, but more concerningly, researchers exclude data from SGM participants. Furthermore, much of SGM research focuses on existing health disparities and risk factors rather than wellness-framed and personality research. To fill in this gap, the current study aims to quantify effect sizes of similarities/differences across a broad range of psychosocial measures.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Applying the framework of the Gender Similarities Hypothesis, we compare means, variances, and correlations across 34 psychosocial variables between categories of SGM, gender identity, sexual orientation, relationship status, and monogamy (N = 1743). Data was collected online mainly through paid ads on Instagram.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Consistently, we find largely similarities across gender identity, sexual orientation, and relationship structure categories. These results support a general expectation that similarities are more common than differences in normative psychological domains, although clear differences in means and variances exist for specific experiences and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This work informs the inclusion of diverse identities in basic psychological research and further speaks to the generalizability of past findings to populations historically underrepresented in psychological science.</p>","PeriodicalId":48421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12989","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people are underrepresented in psychological research. Part of the underrepresentation of SGM people likely stems from potential participants' unwillingness to join a study, but more concerningly, researchers exclude data from SGM participants. Furthermore, much of SGM research focuses on existing health disparities and risk factors rather than wellness-framed and personality research. To fill in this gap, the current study aims to quantify effect sizes of similarities/differences across a broad range of psychosocial measures.

Method: Applying the framework of the Gender Similarities Hypothesis, we compare means, variances, and correlations across 34 psychosocial variables between categories of SGM, gender identity, sexual orientation, relationship status, and monogamy (N = 1743). Data was collected online mainly through paid ads on Instagram.

Results: Consistently, we find largely similarities across gender identity, sexual orientation, and relationship structure categories. These results support a general expectation that similarities are more common than differences in normative psychological domains, although clear differences in means and variances exist for specific experiences and outcomes.

Conclusions: This work informs the inclusion of diverse identities in basic psychological research and further speaks to the generalizability of past findings to populations historically underrepresented in psychological science.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
和别人不一样,但我们是一样的:不同性取向和性别认同的社会心理变量比较。
目的:性与性别少数群体(SGM)在心理学研究中的代表性不足。SGM人群代表性不足的部分原因可能是潜在参与者不愿参加研究,但更令人担忧的是,研究人员排除了SGM参与者的数据。此外,大部分 SGM 研究都集中在现有的健康差异和风险因素上,而不是以健康为框架的人格研究。为了填补这一空白,目前的研究旨在量化广泛的社会心理测量中相似/差异的效应大小:我们运用性别相似性假说的框架,比较了 SGM、性别认同、性取向、关系状态和一夫一妻制(N = 1743)等类别之间 34 个社会心理变量的平均值、方差和相关性。数据主要通过 Instagram 上的付费广告在线收集:结果:我们一致发现,性别认同、性取向和关系结构类别之间存在很大程度的相似性。这些结果支持了一种普遍的预期,即在规范的心理领域中,相似性比差异性更常见,尽管在特定的经历和结果中存在明显的均值和方差差异:这项工作为将不同身份纳入基础心理学研究提供了信息,并进一步说明了过去的研究结果对心理科学中历来代表性不足的人群的普遍适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Personality
Journal of Personality PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
6.00%
发文量
100
期刊介绍: Journal of Personality publishes scientific investigations in the field of personality. It focuses particularly on personality and behavior dynamics, personality development, and individual differences in the cognitive, affective, and interpersonal domains. The journal reflects and stimulates interest in the growth of new theoretical and methodological approaches in personality psychology.
期刊最新文献
Measures of Subclinical Psychopathy and Everyday Sadism are Still Redundant: A Conceptual Replication and Extension of Blötner and Mokros (2023). The (Un)Attractiveness of Dark Triad Personalities: Assessing Fictitious Characters for Short- and Long-Term Relationships. Understanding Parenting Stress in Adoptive Parents: A Longitudinal Multilevel Study of Parents' Self-Criticism, Child Negative Emotionality, and Child Age at Placement. Personality and Meat Consumption Among Romantic Partners in Daily Life Development of Self‐Reported Reward Responsiveness and Inhibitory Control and the Role of Clinical and Neural Predictors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1