Psychol Bull. 2021 Jul;147(7):748. doi: 10.1037/bul0000339.
Reports an error in "The relationship between religiousness and health among sexual minorities: A meta-analysis" by G. Tyler Lefevor, Edward B. Davis, Jaqueline Y. Paiz and Abigail C. P. Smack (, Advanced Online Publication, Apr 01, 2021, np). In the article, there was an error in the calculation of the effect sizes from one study. The three effect sizes for Wolff et al. (2016) listed in Table B1 of the online supplemental materials should have been " = .09, = -.02, = -.05," rather than " = -.18, = .53, = -.35." We rechecked the calculations for other studies and effect sizes and found no additional errors. Further, analyses rerun with the revised data set resulted in no changes in significance for any analyses that included this study; hence, no conclusions were changed because of this error. In the article, the sentences in the final paragraph of the Statistical Analyses section that described this study as an outlier were deleted and replaced with "No such outliers were found." All versions of this article have been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2021-32474-001.) Meta-analyses suggest that religiousness/spirituality (R/S) is consistently and positively associated with health (average r = .15); however, the strength and direction of this relationship is much less clear among sexual minorities, and many sexual minorities experience tension related to R/S. To address this, we present results from the first meta-analysis of the relationship between R/S and health among sexual minorities. Using 279 effect sizes nested within 73 studies, multilevel meta-analyses suggest a small but positive overall relationship between R/S and health among sexual minorities (r = .05), with a substantial amount of residual heterogeneity. Moderator analyses clarify that this relationship is particularly positive when R/S is conceptualized as spirituality (r = .14) or as religious cognition (e.g., belief; r = .10). The relationship between R/S and health disappears or becomes negative when participants are sampled from sexual minority venues (e.g., bars/clubs; r = .01). Minority stress, structural stigma, and causal pathways theories provide some structure to understand results; however, none of these theories is able to explain results fully. We synthesize these theories to provide an initial theoretical explanation: the degree to which R/S promotes or harms sexual minorities' health depends on (a) where the individual is in their sexual identity development/integration; (b) what their current R/S beliefs, practices, and motivations are; and (c) how well their environmental circumstances support their sexual and/or religious identities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
报告了 G. Tyler Lefevor、Edward B. Davis、Jaqueline Y. Paiz 和 Abigail C. P. Smack 发表的“性少数群体中的宗教信仰与健康之间的关系：荟萃分析”（，在线预出版，2021 年 4 月 1 日，np）中的错误。在文章中，一项研究的效应大小计算有误。表 B1 中列出的 Wolff 等人（2016 年）的三个效应大小应该是“=.09，= -.02，= -.05”，而不是“= -.18，=.53，= -.35”。我们重新检查了其他研究和效应大小的计算，没有发现其他错误。此外，使用修订后的数据重新进行分析，没有任何分析的显著性发生变化，包括这项研究；因此，由于这个错误，没有改变任何结论。在文章中，统计学分析部分最后一段描述这项研究为异常值的句子被删除，并替换为“未发现此类异常值。”所有版本的文章都已更正。（原始文章的以下摘要出现在记录 2021-32474-001 中。）荟萃分析表明，宗教信仰/精神（R/S）与健康呈一致且积极的关系（平均 r =.15）；然而，在性少数群体中，这种关系的强度和方向就不那么明显了，许多性少数群体经历着与 R/S 相关的紧张。为了解决这个问题，我们呈现了性少数群体中 R/S 与健康关系的第一个荟萃分析的结果。使用嵌套在 73 项研究中的 279 个效应大小，多层次荟萃分析表明，性少数群体中 R/S 与健康之间存在较小但积极的总体关系（r =.05），存在大量剩余的异质性。调节分析澄清了，当 R/S 被概念化为精神性（r =.14）或宗教认知（例如信仰；r =.10）时，这种关系尤其积极。当参与者从性少数群体场所（例如酒吧/俱乐部；r =.01）中抽取时，R/S 与健康之间的关系就会消失或变得消极。少数群体压力、结构污名和因果途径理论为理解结果提供了一些结构；然而，这些理论都无法完全解释结果。我们综合了这些理论，提供了一个初步的理论解释：R/S 对性少数群体健康的促进或危害程度取决于（a）个体在其性身份发展/整合中的位置；（b）他们目前的 R/S 信仰、实践和动机；（c）他们的环境条件对他们的性和/或宗教身份的支持程度。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2021 APA，保留所有权利）。
