Kuyper Lisette, Fernee Henk, Keuzenkamp Saskia
Department of Education, Minorities, and Methodology, The Netherlands Institute for Social Research, POB 16164, 2500 BD, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Movisie, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Arch Sex Behav. 2016 Apr;45(3):683-93. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0457-1. Epub 2015 Jan 7.
Samples recruited at lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) venues have certain benefits, but a major drawback is that these samples are prone to bias as they only contain LGB participants who visit such venues. Empirical data with regard to the potential differences between LGB community samples and LGB general samples may shed some light on the generalizability of research findings from convenience samples recruited through LGB venues. The current study attempted to contribute to existing knowledge by examining differences in social demographics, sexual orientation, minority stress, and mental health between a convenience sample recruited at LGB venues ("community sample," N = 3,403) and an LGB sample recruited from a general research panel in the Netherlands ("panel sample," N = 1,000). Various differences were found. In general, community participants were younger, reported a more exclusive same-sex sexual orientation, were more open about their sexual orientation, had lower levels of internalized homonegativity, and encountered more negative social reactions on their LGB status. They also reported higher levels of psychological distress and suicidality. The Nagelkerke R (2) of the analyses (which were adjusted for sociodemographic differences) ranged from .08 (suicide plans among men) to .27 (sexual attraction among women). However, while the estimates of sociodemographics, sexual orientation, minority stress, and mental well-being differed, the relationships between these constructs were comparable in both samples. Implications and suggestions for future studies are discussed.
在女同性恋、男同性恋和双性恋(LGB)场所招募的样本有一定优势,但一个主要缺点是这些样本容易产生偏差,因为它们只包含光顾此类场所的LGB参与者。关于LGB社区样本和LGB一般样本之间潜在差异的实证数据,可能会为通过LGB场所招募的便利样本的研究结果的普遍性提供一些启示。当前的研究试图通过考察在LGB场所招募的便利样本(“社区样本”,N = 3403)和从荷兰一般研究小组招募的LGB样本(“小组样本”,N = 1000)之间在社会人口统计学、性取向、少数群体压力和心理健康方面的差异,来为现有知识做出贡献。发现了各种差异。总体而言,社区参与者更年轻,报告的性取向更排他,对自己的性取向更开放,内化的同性恋消极态度水平更低,并且在其LGB身份上遭遇更多负面社会反应。他们还报告了更高水平的心理困扰和自杀倾向。分析的Nagelkerke R(2)(针对社会人口统计学差异进行了调整)范围从0.08(男性中的自杀计划)到0.27(女性中的性吸引力)。然而,虽然社会人口统计学、性取向、少数群体压力和心理健康状况的估计值有所不同,但在两个样本中这些构念之间的关系是可比的。讨论了对未来研究的启示和建议。
J Youth Adolesc. 2009-7-14
Arch Sex Behav. 2023-7
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2022-11
Psychol Sex Orientat Gend Divers. 2022-6
Arch Sex Behav. 2021-4