Clark Kristen D, Lunn Mitchell R, Sevelius Jae M, Dawson-Rose Carol, Weiss Sandra J, Neilands Torsten B, Lubensky Micah E, Obedin-Maliver Juno, Flentje Annesa
Department of Medical Sciences, Psychiatry, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
The PRIDE Study/PRIDEnet, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 23;15(1):2996. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-85013-8.
Structural stigma towards gender minority (GM; people whose current gender does not align with sex assigned at birth) people is an important contributor to minority stress (i.e., stress experienced due to one's marginalized GM identity), although existing variables are unclear in their inclusion of social norms, or societal stigma, as a key component of the construct. We examined potential variables representing structural stigma, including variables that are inclusive of societal stigma, to identify those that most strongly relate to minority stress outcomes. We tested variables identified in the literature as measures of structural stigma inclusive of societal stigma (LGBT + Business Climate Index, state voting behaviors, and Google Trends search data), the most commonly used structural stigma variable (State Policy Environment Tally), and proxy variables (region, population density) for comparison. The relationships between structural stigma and minority stress model outcomes were tested in a sample of GM participants from The Population Research in Identity and Disparities for Equality (PRIDE) Study (N = 2,094) 2019 Annual Questionnaire using a structural equation model (SEM). Lower structural stigma (i.e., higher LGBT Business Climate Index) was associated with lower experienced stigma (β= -0.260, p < .01) and lower anticipated stigma (β= -0.433, p < .001). Greater conservative voting behavior was associated with less experienced stigma (β= -0.103, p < .01). Living in a more densely populated county was also associated with lower anticipated stigma (β=-0.108, p < .001) and greater identity outness (β = 0.053, p < .05). Two of the identified structural stigma variables that were inclusive of societal stigma (i.e., LGBT + Business Climate Index, conservative voting behaviors) and one proxy variable (population density) were associated with minority stress outcomes. However, the most commonly used variable for structural stigma (State Policy Environment Tally) was not associated with any outcomes. The State LGBT + Business Climate Index showed the most promise for use as a structural stigma variable in future research. The application of this variable should be investigated further to explore its association with health outcomes and to inform efforts to reduce health equity barriers experienced by GM people through addressing structural stigma in a manner inclusive of societal stigma.
对性别少数群体(GM;即当前性别与出生时被指定的性别不一致的人)的结构性污名是少数群体压力(即由于个人被边缘化的GM身份而经历的压力)的一个重要促成因素,尽管现有变量在将社会规范或社会污名作为该结构的关键组成部分纳入方面并不明确。我们研究了代表结构性污名的潜在变量,包括那些包含社会污名的变量,以确定那些与少数群体压力结果最密切相关的变量。我们测试了文献中确定的作为包含社会污名的结构性污名衡量指标的变量(LGBT + 商业气候指数、州投票行为和谷歌趋势搜索数据)、最常用的结构性污名变量(州政策环境统计)以及用于比较的代理变量(地区、人口密度)。使用结构方程模型(SEM),在平等身份与差异人口研究(PRIDE)2019年年度调查问卷的GM参与者样本(N = 2,094)中测试了结构性污名与少数群体压力模型结果之间的关系。较低的结构性污名(即较高的LGBT商业气候指数)与较低的经历污名(β = -0.260,p <.01)和较低的预期污名(β = -0.433,p <.001)相关。更大的保守投票行为与较少的经历污名(β = -0.103,p <.01)相关。生活在人口更密集的县也与较低的预期污名(β = -0.108,p <.001)和更高的身份公开度(β = 0.053,p <.05)相关。两个已确定的包含社会污名的结构性污名变量(即LGBT + 商业气候指数、保守投票行为)和一个代理变量(人口密度)与少数群体压力结果相关。然而,最常用的结构性污名变量(州政策环境统计)与任何结果均无关联。州LGBT + 商业气候指数在未来研究中作为结构性污名变量显示出最大的前景。应进一步研究该变量的应用,以探索其与健康结果的关联,并通过以包含社会污名的方式解决结构性污名,为减少GM人群所经历的健康公平障碍的努力提供信息。