Weinrich J D, Snyder P J, Pillard R C, Grant I, Jacobson D L, Robinson S R, McCutchan J A
HIV Neurobehavioral Research Center, University of California, San Diego 92103.
Arch Sex Behav. 1993 Apr;22(2):157-68. doi: 10.1007/BF01542364.
Many researchers interested in sexual orientation can be separated into two camps: The "lumpers," who try to reduce sexual classifications to as small a number of categories as possible, and the "splitters," who try to show differences among groups and individuals that make classification schemes increasingly difficult and/or intricate. We report factor analyses of the Klein Grid (a questionnaire with 21 sexual orientation items) to see how many factors emerge in two samples of strikingly different origins. In both samples, the first factor to emerge loaded substantially on all of the Klein Grid's 21 items. This factor accounted for a majority of the variance. In both samples, a second, correlated factor emerged which indexed a separation between most of the items and those having to do with social and/or emotional preferences. In both samples, a third correlated factor also emerged, but this factor differed between the two populations: one refined the social/emotional distinction and the other distinguished ideal behavior from past and current behavior. We conclude on the basis of our analysis that both the lumpers and the splitters are correct.
“合并派”，他们试图将性取向分类尽可能简化为少数几个类别；以及“细分派”，他们试图揭示群体和个体之间的差异，这些差异使得分类方案变得越来越困难和/或复杂。我们报告了对克莱因网格（一份包含21个性取向项目的问卷）的因子分析，以了解在两个来源截然不同的样本中会出现多少个因子。在两个样本中，第一个出现的因子在克莱因网格的所有21个项目上都有显著载荷。这个因子解释了大部分方差。在两个样本中，第二个相关因子出现了，它表明大多数项目与那些与社会和/或情感偏好相关的项目之间的区分。在两个样本中，第三个相关因子也出现了，但这个因子在两个人群中有所不同：一个细化了社会/情感区分，另一个区分了理想行为与过去和当前行为。基于我们的分析，我们得出结论，合并派和细分派都是正确的。
