Psychology assignment 2

The Role of Spirituality in Sexual Minority Identity

A. Jordan Wright and Suzanne Stern Empire State College, State University of New York

Spirituality has been widely associated with positive well-being within the general population. Although there is limited research on the impact of spirituality on sexual minority individuals, some evidence suggests it is associated with positive psychological outcomes and contributes to the development of a positive lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) identity. The present study aimed to elucidate the relationship between spirituality, gender normative beliefs, and LGB identity development. It was hypothesized that spirituality would be negatively associated with both heteronormative beliefs and attitudes and negative sexual minority identity, and that heteronormativity would mediate the relationship between spirituality and negative identity. Contrary to expectations, spirituality predicted greater heteronormativity and greater negative identity. The association between spirituality and negative identity was fully mediated by heteronormativity. Limitations and implications are discussed.

Keywords: homosexuality, bisexuality, spirituality, heteronormativity, gay identity

Within the general public, spirituality has been reliably con- nected to numerous positive outcomes (Garfield, Isacco, & Sahker, 2013; Paranjape & Kaslow, 2010; Thoresen, 1999). It has been found to promote resiliency and self-esteem (Haight, 1998; Kash- dan & Nezlek, 2012), and predicts a greater ability to adapt and cope with stressful situations (Gnanaprakash, 2013; Salas-Wright, Olate, & Vaughn, 2013), including illness (Lo et al., 2010; Nelson et al., 2009; Pagnini et al., 2011; Visser, Garssen, & Vingerhoets, 2010), exposure to violence (Benavides, 2012; Schneider & Feltey, 2009; E. A. Walker, 2000), psychological aggression (Austin & Falconier, 2013), and substance abuse (Turner-Musa & Lipscomb, 2007). Further, spirituality is associated with personality traits that are health-protective (Labbé & Fobes, 2010); it is also significantly protective against adverse mental health outcomes, such as depres- sion and anxiety (Bennett & Shepherd, 2013; Hourani et al., 2012; Hsiao et al., 2012; Sorajjakool, Aja, Chilson, Ramirez-Johnson, & Earll, 2008), and suicidal ideation (Henley, 2014; Kyle, 2013; Meadows, Kaslow, Thompson, & Jurkovic, 2005).

While the research on the impact of spirituality on sexual minorities is more limited, there is evidence that spiritual well- being functions as a protective factor and a predictor of adjust- ment. Greater spirituality has been associated with positive out- comes such as increased self-esteem and identity affirmation, lower internalized homophobia, and fewer feelings of alienation (Lease, Horne, & Noffsinger-Frazier, 2005; Moleiro, Pinto, & Freire, 2013; Tan, 2005), and with greater positive affect and satisfaction with life (Harari, Glenwick, & Cecero, 2014). How- ever, awareness within this population of spirituality’s role as a protective factor may be limited: in a study of lesbian, gay,

bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) individuals conducted by Halkitis and colleagues (2009), only 1% of all participants (N � 428) actively identified spirituality as a coping or resiliency mech- anism.

These findings are particularly notable because the LGB com- munity is at increased risk for a number of adverse psychological and physical outcomes (Diamant, Wold, Spritzer, & Gelberg, 2000; Ungvarski & Grossman, 1999), resulting from overt factors such as stigma-related and minority stress, perceived or experi- enced discrimination or violence, and negative social reactions (Hatzenbuehler, 2009; Lick, Durso, & Johnson, 2013; Plöderl, Kralovec, Fartacek, & Fartacek, 2010), as well as exposure to unintended, minor, or transitory homophobia (Woodford, Howell, Silverschanz, & Yu, 2012; Wright & Wegner, 2012). Overall, sexual minorities experience higher rates of mood and substance use disorders, suicide ideation or attempt (Fergusson, Horwood, & Beautrais, 1999; Gilman et al., 2001; Herek, Gillis, & Cogan, 1999; King et al., 2008; Meyer, 2003), and psychosomatic disor- ders (Lick et al., 2013) than their heterosexual counterparts.

Accordingly, given that spirituality has health protective and coping effects among the general public, and that these effects could positively impact psychological outcomes in the LGB com- munity, a more precise elucidation of the effect of spirituality on sexual minority individuals would be both clinically and theoret- ically relevant.

Spirituality

As interest in spirituality within the social sciences increased throughout the past few decades, the need arose for conceptual- ization. Broadly, spirituality can be defined as an individual rela- tionship with or connection to a higher power or intrinsic belief that motivates behaviors and provides meaning and purpose (Cow- ard, 2014; Hill et al., 2000; Hodge & McGrew, 2004). It is intrapsychic, experiential, and noninstitutional; it can complement, overlap with, or exist in the absence of organized religion. How- ever, the concept of spirituality is rich, complex, and defined in multiple ways throughout the scholarly and popular literature.

This article was published Online First October 26, 2015. A. Jordan Wright and Suzanne Stern, Empire State College, State

University of New York. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to A. Jordan

Wright, Empire State College, State University of New York, 325 Hudson Street, New York, NY 10013. E-mail: [email protected]

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity © 2015 American Psychological Association 2016, Vol. 3, No. 1, 71–79 2329-0382/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000139

71

Some researchers (e.g., Miller & Thoresen, 2003) have posited that spirituality is sufficiently multifaceted as to belie a precise definition, and numerous studies elucidate spirituality’s complex and multidimensional nature. For example, Elkins, Hedstrom, Hughes, Leaf, and Saunders (1988) identified nine discrete dimen- sions of spirituality, while Derezotes (1995) reported seven defi- nitions. However, major themes in both studies included meaning, purpose, and mission in life. Similarly, the top three descriptors in a study by Canda and Furman (1999) were “meaning,” “personal,” and “purpose,” and Zinnbauer and colleagues (1997) noted the salience of a personal relationship with a higher power. While these similarities span across some studies, the stark differences in definition underscore how complex the concept is.

The aforementioned studies used general populations, whose experiences may not echo those of sexual minorities. For example, Boisvert (2000) adds further dimensionality, nuance, and complex- ity, contending that gay spirituality is inherently nonorthodox, eclectic, defiant, and intertwined with political activism, motivated by the marginalization, stigmatization, and rejection by traditional Western religious traditions. He contends that spirituality is intri- cately intertwined and inseparable from all aspects of identity development, including sexual minority identity. Prior and Cusack (2009) further summarize how secular spirituality underscored the transformative process of gay sexual exploration and how this helped to define the gay movement. In fact, this study revealed that the sexual exploration in bathhouses for certain sexual minorities served as spiritual experiences, and even religiouslike rituals for growth and self-transformation. Ritter and Terndrup (2002) illus- trate the diversity of exploration of spirituality undertaken by sexual minority individuals, including alternative forms of worship such as Wicca, witchcraft, and other prepatriarchal spir- itual routes; shamanism, which straddles the spiritual and natural realms; and spiritual healing and transformation, or working to transmute loss through spiritual development. Perhaps no move- ment captures the essence of this description better than the Rad- ical Faeries: diverse ancient traditions were compiled and mod- ernized, and gender norms challenged, to reconstruct spirituality from a uniquely gay perspective (Rodgers, 1995).

However, other LGB researchers have identified more universal conceptions of spirituality within this population. A number of individuals (28%) in a study by Halkitis and colleagues (2009) defined their spirituality as a connection with or belief in a higher power. Other prominent themes included a means to gain self- understanding and self-acceptance and a motivator of behavior.

Identity

Developing a positive identity is central to psychological well- being (Ghavami, Fingerhut, Peplau, Grant, & Wittig, 2011). Sex- ual minorities, however, regularly encounter obstacles which can hinder the identity development process. These broadly include heterosexist norms and pressures (Mock & Eibach, 2012), negative relationships, and a lack of social support (Rosario, Schrimshaw, & Hunter, 2008). A further source of distress can arise from discord between multiple identities with disparate demands (Burke, 1991), such as the codevelopment of sexual and religious identities during adolescence (Yarhouse & Tan, 2005).

There is evidence to suggest that greater spirituality is associ- ated with identity affirmation and less homonegativity (Moleiro et

al., 2013), greater self-esteem and more openness about sexual orientation (Rodriguez, Lytle, & Vaughan, 2013). However, much of the scholarly literature on LGB identity and spirituality is from a clinical perspective, focused on ethical considerations and ther- apeutic goals of reconciliation of conflicting religious and sexual identities. It has been widely noted that involvement in accepting or affirming forms of worship can support the integration of sexual and religious identities (Beardsley, O’Brien, & Woolley, 2010; Daniels, 2010; Rodriguez & Ouellette, 2000; Smith & Horne, 2007); this may be accomplished through the development of strategies that counter and reframe stigmatizing antihomosexual doctrine (Johnson, 2000; Thumma, 1991; Yip, 1997), thereby reducing identity conflict. However, Smith and Horne (2007) found that participation in religious congregations that are more highly gay-affirming may not ultimately make a significant differ- ence in resolution of identity conflict. Although those sexual minority individuals in more traditional Judeo-Christian faiths did report more conflict than those in “Earth-spirited” faiths (which they found to engage in many LGBT-affirming behaviors), there was no difference in the level of conflict or resolution of the conflict, related to internalized homonegativity and self- acceptance. Pargament (2002) contended that the association of religion with well-being occurs only when the religion is based on spirituality, while Carter (2013) reported that spirituality more than religiosity was seen as helping to buffer sexual identity conflict. Faith development theory, developed by Fowler (1981), organizes faith identity development into stages related to reasoning about spirituality and questioning reality, and Leak (2009) found that those who were actively exploring their own identity seemed to be more open to questions about faith and were higher in faith development, again showing the complexity of these intertwined identity constructs.

Heteronormativity

Heteronormativity broadly refers to sociocultural, political, and industrial standardization and expectations of gender normative attitudes and behaviors (e.g., Berlant & Warner, 1998). This in- cludes the privileging of heterosexuality and the marginalization of those who exist outside of heteronormative expectations (Jackson, 2006); this stigmatization is a significant source of minority stress (Meyer, 2003). Among the general population, Habarth (2008) found positive associations between heteronormativity and social conservatism, and heteronormativity and right-wing authoritarian- ism in the general population; among sexual minorities specifi- cally, a negative relationship was found between heteronormativity and life satisfaction. A high degree of concern about conforming to established heteronormative conventions, such as compliance with traditional gender roles, is particularly associated with negative LGB identity (Estrada, Rigali-Oiler, Arciniega, & Tracey, 2011; Gubrium & Torres, 2011; Hamilton & Mahalik, 2009; Sánchez & Vilain, 2012).

Current Study

Spirituality may influence positive psychological health out- comes among sexual minorities. Spirituality refers to an individ- ual’s inner relationship with a motivational or inspirational higher power: this higher power can take the form of a deity or can be

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

72 WRIGHT AND STERN

purely conceptual. This relationship may or may not be expressed externally at the individual’s discretion and is not necessarily bound to the confines of religiosity; that is, a spiritual individual may or may not belong to a particular religious community or even identify with any religious orientation. Spirituality is defined on an individual basis in a manner that is both personal and meaningful.

There is not a large body of research of the impact of spirituality in the LGB population. The current study seeks to examine how spirituality might impact concern for gender norms, and whether this has an effect on LGB identity development. It is hypothesized that a negative association will exist between spirituality and heteronormativity, and that heteronormativity would be positively related to negative identity. Because spirituality can exist outside of religiosity, more highly spiritual LGB individuals may be pro- tected from religious stigma, which has been linked to higher levels of internalized homonegativity (Ross & Rosser, 1996; J. Walker, 2012) and negative identity (e.g., Lapinski & McKirnan, 2013): therefore, it is further hypothesized that for sexual minor- ities, less concern for heteronormativity will mediate the relation- ship between intrinsic spirituality and negative identity. Although not the major focus of this study, since identity development for sexual minorities can be influenced by considerations such as sexual orientation (specifically less developed identity for bisexual individuals; e.g., Rosario, Schrimshaw, Hunter, & Braun, 2006) and ethnicity (specifically less developed or delayed identity de- velopment for racial and ethnic minorities, as compared to white individuals; e.g., Rosario, Schrimshaw, & Hunter, 2004), these demographics will be used as controls when evaluating these hypotheses.

Method

Participants

The present sample was comprised of adult individuals (N � 109) who self-identified as lesbian (22.0%), gay (40.4%), or bi- sexual (22.2%). Participants were nearly evenly split by gender (male, 45.9%), with the majority of bisexual participants (68%) being female. The mean age was 30 years old (SD � 7.8). Half of participants (51.4%) reported being “in a significant relationship.” The sample included participants from urban, suburban, and rural areas across the United States, with the majority of participants self-identified as white (68.8%), followed by Asian & Pacific Islander (11.0%), Latino/a (10.1%), Black (8.3%), and Native American (1.8%). Table 1 presents demographic descriptors.

Design and Procedure

Participants were recruited via a Facebook group that was established to promote the study, as well as through messages posted on several LGB online message boards. Before beginning the survey, which was administered online using Surveymonkey (www.surveymonkey.com), all were informed that the study was approved by [masked for review] Institutional Review Board and agreed to informed consent online by clicking an “accept” button at the bottom of a standard consent form. The entire survey was comprised of 16 measures, of which the current study used three, plus demographics, and took approximately 1.5 hr to complete.

Upon completion, the participants could choose to receive a $25 Amazon.com gift card.

Measures

Demographics. Participants were asked to indicate demo- graphic characteristics including sexual orientation (collapsed into lesbian, gay, bisexual), relationship status (single or in a significant relationship, with more nuanced responses such as “married” and “partnered” collapsed into “in a significant relationship”) and race/ethnicity (White, Black, Latino/a, Asian/Pacific Islander, Na- tive American, Other). Because a small number of ethnic minor- ities were represented, participants were dichotomized into racial/ ethnic minority versus nonminority. Participants also self-reported their age.

Intrinsic Spirituality Scale (ISS). The ISS (Hodge, 2003) is a 6-item measure that measures the degree to which nonreligious spirituality serves as a primary motivator, driving and guiding behaviors, thoughts, and growth. The scale is modified from the Intrinsic subscale of Allport and Ross’ (1967) Religious Orienta- tion Scale (ROS), which assesses this motivational power of one’s connection to Transcendence within a religious context. The ISS addresses spirituality in a more general, nonreligious, and nonthe- istic framework by removing mention of God, church, or religion, and was designed to be administered to individuals who may not necessarily participate in organized religious worship or activities. The six items employ a phrase completion method measured along an 11-point continuum (e.g., responses for the item “My spiritual beliefs affect” range from 0 � “no aspect of my life” to 10 � “absolutely every aspect of my life”; responses for the item “Spir- ituality is” range from 0 � “not part of my life” to 10 � “the master motive of my life, directing every other aspect of my life”). A high score is representative of a high degree of spiritual moti- vation. Correlations were found between the ISS and the ROS Intrinsic subscale (r � .91). Items were found through factor analysis to load onto a single dimension of spirituality (Gough, Wilks, & Prattini, 2010). Reliability and validity for the ISS have been previous ascertained; alpha for the present sample on the ISS was 0.97.

Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale (LGBIS). Mohr and Fassinger’s (2000) LGBIS is a 27-item measure developed to

Table 1 Descriptive Data for Demographic and Study Variables (N � 109)

Variable Minimum Maximum Mean SD Percentages

Age 18 62 30.38 7.78 Racial/ethnic minority 31.2 In a relationship 51.4 Sexual orientation

Gay 33.9 Lesbian 28.4 Bisexual 37.6

Spirituality 0 6.33 4.59 1.84 Heteronormativity 2.38 5.56 3.33 .64 Negative Identity 1.14 6.71 3.63 .64

Note. Spirituality � Intrinsic Spirituality Scale; Heteronormativity � Heteronormative Attitudes and Beliefs Scale; Negative Identity � Nega- tive Identity subscale from the Lesbian Gay and Bisexual Identity Scale.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

73SPIRITUALITY AND SEXUAL MINORITY IDENTITY

evaluate seven continuous dimensions of LGB identity that have been identified and discussed in the clinical and theoretical liter- ature. The seven subscales include Internalized Homonegativity/ Binegativity (e.g., “If it were possible, I would choose to be straight”), Concealment Motivation (e.g., “I prefer to keep my same-sex romantic relationships rather private”), Acceptance Concerns (e.g., “I often wonder whether others judge me for my sexual orientation”), Identity Uncertainty (e.g., “I’m not totally sure what my sexual orientation is”), Difficult Process (e.g., “Ad- mitting to myself that I’m an LGB person has been a very painful process”), Identity Centrality (e.g., “To understand who I am as a person, you have to know that I’m LGB”), and Identity Superiority (e.g., “I look down on heterosexuals”). All subscales have dem- onstrated constancy in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations (de Oliveira, Lopes, Costa, & Nogueira, 2012). Items employ a 6-point Likert scale, with responses ranging from “disagree strongly” to “agree strongly” The Internalized Homonegativity/Binegativity, Concealment Motivation, Acceptance Concerns, and Difficult Pro- cess subscales were found through factor analysis to load onto a single, second-order factor and are combined to create a single factor reflecting the degree of Negative Identity (Mohr & Fassinger, 2000). Although psychometrics on the Negative Iden- tity factor are not published, the included subscales demonstrate good internal consistency. This study utilized the computed Neg- ative Identity subscale, where higher scores are indicative of greater negative identity. Alpha for the present sample on the Negative Identity subscale was 0.93.

Heteronormative Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (HABS). The HABS (Habarth, 2008) is a 16-item measure designed to assess expectations of normative behavior and essentialized and binary beliefs regarding gender and sex. Two 8-item subscales include Gender as Binary and Normative Sexual Behavior: Gender as Binary addresses the extent to which gender is believed to be dichotomous, for example, “There are only two sexes: male and female,” while Normative Sexual Behavior evaluates expectations of traditional gender roles, for example, “People should partner with whomever they choose, regardless of sex or gender.” Items are rated on a 7-point scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree,” with higher scores reflecting a higher degree of heteron- ormativity. The HABS was found to be associated positively with a measure of right-wing authoritarianism, particularly among het-

erosexuals (Habarth, 2008). Separate analysis found the scale to have sufficient reliability and consistency (Els, 2012). This study used the entire scale. Alpha for the present sample on the HABS was 0.72.

Results

A hierarchy of regressions was used in accordance with Baron and Kenny’s (1986) recommendations for testing for mediation in a linear regression framework. This four-regression approach en- tails that each of the first three analyses must exhibit significance, with the predictor predicting both outcome and proposed mediator, and proposed mediator predicting the outcome. If these analyses are indeed significant, a fourth and final regression can be run (with predictor and proposed mediator predict the outcome) to test for full mediation.

Each analysis was conducted using two steps. To control for demographic differences, the first step in all analyses included a number of demographic covariates; these included age as a con- tinuous variable and minority status, relationship status, lesbian, and bisexual, each as dummy coded variables. These were in- cluded for conceptual reasons, though the intercorrelations (Pear- son’s r, point-biserial correlations, and chi-square statistics, where appropriate) between these variables and the study variables was minimal (Table 2). The four regressions run included Negative Identity (outcome) being regressed on Spirituality (predictor); Negative Identity (outcome) regressed on Heteronormativity (pro- posed mediator); Heteronormativity (proposed mediator) regressed on Spirituality (predictor); and finally, to test for mediation, Neg- ative Identity regressed on both Heteronormativity and Spirituality in the same model.

Spirituality and Negative Identity

As seen in Table 3, when predicting Negative Identity, age and minority status significantly predicted negative identity. Specifi- cally, higher ages had higher negative identity (� � 0.222, p � .05) and minorities had higher negative identity than nonminorities (� � 0.215, p � .05).

Table 3 also shows that Spirituality significantly predicts Neg- ative Identity, controlling for demographics. Specifically, greater

Table 2 Intercorrelations Between Demographic and Study Variables (N � 109)

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Age 1.00 2. Minority .001 1.00 3. In a relationship .225� �.217� 1.00 Sexual orientation

4. Gay .063 3.790� .000 1.00 5. Lesbian �.120 .372 2.782 .00 1.00 6. Bisexual .050 6.101� 2.424 .00 .00 1.00

7. Spirituality �.168 .110 �.104 .116 .009 �.122 1.00 8. Heteronormativity .060 .110 �.067 .165 �.115 �.054 .382�� 1.00 9. Negative Identity .193� .227� �.117 .001 .001 �.002 .288�� .543��� 1.00

Note. Spirituality � Intrinsic Spirituality Scale; Heteronormativity � Heteronormative Attitudes and Beliefs Scale; Negative Identity � Negative Identity subscale from the Lesbian Gay and Bisexual Identity Scale. Correlations include Pearson’s correlations (between continuous variables), point-biserial correlations (between dichotomous and continuous variables), and chi-squares (between dichotomous variables). � p � .05. �� p � .01. ��� p � .001.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

74 WRIGHT AND STERN

Spirituality was related to greater Negative Identity (� � 0. 314; t(101) � 3.449; p � .001). Spirituality accounted for 9.3% of the variance in Negative Identity (R2 change � 0.093; F(7, 101) � 4.238; p � .001).

Heteronormativity and Negative Identity

Table 4 shows that Heteronormativity independently signifi- cantly predicts Negative Identity (� � 0.519; t(101) � 6.426; p � .001), such that greater Heteronormativity predicted higher Neg- ative Identity (see also Figure 1). Heteronormativity accounted for 25.8% of the variance in Negative Identity (R2 change � 0.258; F(7, 101) � 9.720; p � .001).

Spirituality and Heteronormativity

When predicting Heteronormativity, Table 5 shows that Spiri- tuality significantly predicted Heteronormativity (� � 0.384; t(101) � 4.176; p � .001), accounting for 14% of the variance in Heteronormativity (R2 change � 0.140; F(7, 101) � 3.831; p � .01), such that greater Spirituality predicted higher Heteronorma- tivity (see also Figure 2).

Mediation Model

As presented in Table 6, when both Spirituality and Heteronor- mativity were included together in a single step as predictors of Negative Identity, only Heteronormativity remained a significant predictor (� � 0. 468; t(100) � 5.390; p � .001), and the effect of

Spirituality was no longer significant (� � 0.134; t(100) � 1.540; p � .05). This indicates that the association between Spirituality and Negative Identity is fully mediated by Heteronormativity (see Figure 2).

Discussion

Contemporary research defines spirituality as an internal, per- sonal, and motivating relationship with a higher power or belief (Hill et al., 2000; Hodge, 2003). Spirituality has widely been associated with numerous positive psychological and physical health outcomes in the general population. What limited research exists on spirituality’s impact on sexual minority individuals in- dicates that it may be a protective factor and may lead to devel- opment of a more positive LGB identity. Since this community is at risk for negative physical and mental health outcomes, primarily as a result of factors such as minority stress and victimization, a greater understanding of how spirituality functions within this population is needed.

Because previous research suggests that spirituality is associated with well-being in the general population, and possibly also among sexual minorities, the present study hypothesized that spirituality would be associated with positive outcomes for LGB individuals. Contrary to this hypothesis, spirituality actually predicted greater negative identity, and this relationship was mediated by heteron- ormativity. That is, the reason spirituality was found to be related to negative identity was because it is associated with heightened heteronormativity.

While these results indicate that spirituality may not be a pro- tective factor for sexual minority individuals, care should be taken to interpret these data in light of the ubiquitous conflation of spirituality and religion, both in the literature and in the larger Western culture. It is only in the past few decades that spirituality

Table 3 Hierarchical Regression Analysis Summary for Demographic Variables and Spirituality Predicting Negative Identity (N � 109)

Block Predictor variable B SE B � R2 �R2

Block 1 Age .033 .014 .222� .106 Minority .538 .246 .215�

Relationship �.292 .230 �.126 Lesbian .076 .278 .030 Bisexual .169 .264 .070

Block 2 Spirituality .199 .058 .314��� .200 .093

Note. Spirituality � Intrinsic Spirituality Scale. � p � .05. ��� p � .001.

Table 4 Hierarchical Regression Analysis Summary for Demographic Variables and Heteronormativity Predicting Negative Identity (N � 109)

Block Predictor variable B SE B � R2 �R2

Block 1 Age .033 .014 .222� .106 Minority .538 .246 .215�

Relationship �.292 .230 �.126 Lesbian .076 .278 .030 Bisexual .169 .264 .070

Block 2 Heteronormativity .941 .146 .519��� .364 .258

Note. Heteronormativity � Heteronormative Attitudes and Beliefs Scale. � p � .05. ��� p � .001.

Table 5 Hierarchical Regression Analysis Summary for Demographic Variables and Spirituality Predicting Heteronormativity (N � 109)

Block Predictor variable B SE B � R2 �R2

Block 1 Age .005 .008 .061 .044 Minority .106 .140 .077 Relationship �.097 .131 �.076 Lesbian �.257 .159 �.181 Bisexual �.154 .150 �.116

Block 2 Spirituality .134 .032 .384��� .184 .140

Note. Spirituality � Intrinsic Spirituality Scale; Heteronormativity � Heteronormative Attitudes and Beliefs Scale. ��� p � .001.

β = .314***

Spirituality

Heteronormativity

Negative Identity

β = .519***

Figure 1. Summary of direct effects of spirituality and heteronormativity on negative identity. � � � regression coefficient. ��� p � .001.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

75SPIRITUALITY AND SEXUAL MINORITY IDENTITY

and religion have been recognized as independent constructs, with much of that time spent in an attempt at operationalization (Oman, 2013). While spirituality refers to one’s subjective, inner relation- ship with some higher power, religion is the externalized involve- ment in a standardized organization of beliefs and practices (e.g., Tan, 2005). A quick review of the literature reveals that these constructs are often used interchangeably, despite the fact that spirituality is not predicted by measures of religiosity (Hodge & McGrew, 2004), such as affiliation, frequency of prayer, and attendance at services. Traditional, nonaffirming religious affilia- tion has been found to be associated with higher levels of inter- nalized homophobia (Barnes & Meyer, 2012), which may have a great impact on identity development.

This overlap is particularly salient when looking at sexual minority populations. While religion, like spirituality, may be associated with positive outcomes in the general public, a signif- icant number of studies have associated religious participation with adverse health outcomes in the LGB community, even among individuals involved with affirming congregations. For example, Smith and Horne (2007) reported that sexual minorities actively involved in Judeo-Christian-based worship maintained levels of internalized homonegativity consistent with individuals involved in gay-affirming alternative practices. Internalized homonegativity is a predictor of psychological distress (Szymanski & Kashubeck- West, 2008) and is correlated with increased anxiety and depres- sion (Newcomb & Mustanski, 2010).

The more highly spiritual LGB individuals in the present sample may experience a personal relationship with a higher power that is irreconcilably connected to exposure to nonaffirming theological learning. Similarly, they may be currently affiliated with a reli- gious community. In both cases, individuals may have associated spirituality directly with past or current religious practices and affiliations. It is also possible that more highly spiritual individuals may be members of religious communities where they actively encounter overt or veiled homonegative messages, thereby stalling development of a positive LGB identity.

Alternately, a lower spiritual score may represent a conscious rejection of the construct of religion and, as a byproduct, spiritu- ality. Haldeman (2002) notes that one response of LGB individuals to homonegative doctrine and the distress it can engender is to adopt an antireligious stance. Since religion and spirituality are so often linked, when religion is rebuffed, spiritual beliefs may be as well.

The ubiquitous conflation of spirituality and religion may pres- ent further issues in regard to data collection. For example, asso- ciating spirituality with religiosity may color subjects’ responses on measures of spirituality, such that the validity of the measures

may be in question. In the current study, ISS defines spirituality as one’s “relationship to God, or whatever you perceive to be Ulti- mate Transcendence,” even though theistic references are omitted from the items themselves. It is therefore possible that the mention of “God” prompted some subjects to associate this measure of spirituality with religion. That is, some subjects may have associ- ated this overt reference to a religious deity or to marginalizing religious traditions, and this may have primed them for higher homonegative and negative identity scores.

Yet another consideration is that the 6-item ISS may be too limited to evaluate spirituality within this population. The measure was designed to assess the degree to which one’s relationship with a higher power functions as a motivational force that provides purpose, fuels personal growth, answers questions, and influences decisions. As previous research suggests (e.g., Halkitis et al., 2009), these themes of personal connection to a higher power, behavioral motivation, personal growth, and means by which understanding is increased are consistent with many LGB individ- ual’s conception of spirituality. However, this measure does not take into account specific aspects of gay spirituality such as transformation, defiance, and political activism, and as such, it may not be a valid measure of how spirituality is experienced by all sexual minority individuals.

These initial findings are important, as they not only challenge the belief of spirituality as a protective factor for sexual minorities but implicate spirituality as possibly contributing to negative psy- chological health outcomes. In a practical light, results indicate that within this at-risk population, there is a possibility that spir- itually based therapeutic interventions may have undesirable or even harmful effects. It further illustrates the need for a greater understanding of how spirituality functions within this population.

Limitations and Future Directions

The present study has a number of limitations. A cross-sectional/ correlational design means that we cannot be confident in the direc- tionality of associations. For example, although spirituality was found to predict negative identity, it is possible that negative identity influ- ences individuals to become more spiritual; indeed, some aspects of gay spirituality have developed to counteract the stigma and victim- ization experienced by LGB individuals. With the majority of par- ticipants identifying as White, the sample did not reflect a great

Table 6 Hierarchical Regression Analysis Summary for Demographic Variables, Spirituality, and Heteronormativity Predicting Negative Identity (N � 109)

Block Predictor variable B SE B � R2 �R2

Block 1 Age .033 .014 .222� .106 Minority .538 .246 .215�

Relationship �.292 .230 �.126 Lesbian .076 .278 .030 Bisexual .169 .264 .070

Block 2 Heteronormativity .849 .157 .468��� .378 .272 Spirituality .085 .055 .134

Note. Spirituality � Intrinsic Spirituality Scale; Heteronormativity � Heteronormative Attitudes and Beliefs Scale. � p � .05. ��� p � .001.

Spirituality

Heteronormativity

Negative Identity

β = .468*** β = .384***

β = .134

Figure 2. Summary of direct and indirect effects of spirituality and heter- onormativity on negative identity. � � � regression coefficient. ��� p � .001.

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

76 WRIGHT AND STERN

deal of ethnic and cultural diversity. Perhaps most significantly, this study did not include any measures of religiosity, nor did subjects provide demographic information pertaining to past or current religious affiliation. Therefore, it is impossible to account for the effect of past or current religious beliefs, behaviors, affil- iations, or experiences.

Additional research is necessary to more precisely evaluate the impact of spirituality on the LGB population. Further studies should include more robust measures of spirituality than the 6-item ISS. The ISS was used in this study because we believed it to succinctly capture the general essence of spirituality; however, a measure with more dimensionality may more accurately capture the LGB spiritual experience. Additionally, employing a measure of religiosity and collecting religious demographics will help to control for the effects of past or current involvement with a religious congregation. Oversampling ethnic minority individuals, as well as those individuals affiliated with nontraditional, non- Western, or affirming religious congregations, will ensure a more diverse evaluation of this population.

References

Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432– 443. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0021212

Austin, J. L., & Falconier, M. K. (2013). Spirituality and common dyadic coping: Protective factors from psychological aggression in Latino im- migrant couples. Journal of Family Issues, 34, 323–346. http://dx.doi .org/10.1177/0192513X12452252

Barnes, D. M., & Meyer, I. H. (2012). Religious affiliation, internalized homophobia, and mental health in lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82, 505–515. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1111/j.1939-0025.2012.01185.x

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Beardsley, C., O’Brien, M., & Woolley, J. (2010). Exploring the interplay: The Sibyls’ “Gender, Sexuality and Spirituality” Workshop. Theology & Sexuality, 16, 259 –283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/tse.v16i3.259

Benavides, L. E. (2012). A phenomenological study of spirituality as a protective factor for adolescents exposed to domestic violence. Journal of Social Service Research, 38, 165–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 01488376.2011.615274

Bennett, K. S., & Shepherd, J. M. (2013). Depression in Australian women: The varied roles of spirituality and social support. Journal of Health Psy- chology, 18, 429 – 438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1359105312443400

Berlant, L., & Warner, M. (1998). Sex in public. Critical Inquiry, 24, 547–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/448884

Boisvert, D. L. (2000). Out on holy ground: Meditations on gay men’s spirituality. Bohemia, NY: Pilgrim Press.

Burke, P. (1991). Identity processes and social stress. American Sociolog- ical Review, 56, 836 – 849. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2096259

Canda, E. R., & Furman, L. D. (1999). Spiritual diversity in social work practice. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Carter, J. W., Jr. (2013). Giving voice to black gay and bisexual men in the south: Examining the influences of religion, spirituality, and family on the mental health and sexual behaviors of black gay and bisexual men (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and The- ses Full Text: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (Order No. 3608553)

Coward, A. I. (2013). Clarifying the overlap between religion and spiri- tuality (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Fairleigh Dickinson Univer- sity, Teaneck, NJ.

Daniels, M. (2010). Not even on the p.: Freeing God from heterocentrism. Journal of Bisexuality, 10, 44 –53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 15299711003609633

de Oliveira, J. M., Lopes, D., Costa, C. G., & Nogueira, C. (2012). Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale (LGBIS): Construct validation, sensi- tivity analyses and other psychometric properties. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15, 334 –347. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012 .v15.n1.37340

Derezotes, D. S. (1995). Spirituality and religiosity: Neglected factors in social work practice. Arete, 20, 1–15.

Diamant, A. L., Wold, C., Spritzer, K., & Gelberg, L. (2000). Health behaviors, health status, and access to and use of health care: A population-based study of lesbian, bisexual, and heterosexual women. Archives of Family Medicine, 9, 1043–1051. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/ archfami.9.10.1043

Elkins, D. N., Hedstrom, L. J., Hughes, L. L., Leaf, J. A., & Saunders, C. (1988). Toward a humanistic-phenomenological spirituality: Definition, description, and measurement. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 28, 5–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022167888284002

Els, E. (2012). The relationship between a heteronormative culture and the affective reactions of homosexual employees (Magister’s dissertation). University of Pretoria, Hatfield, South Africa.

Estrada, F., Rigali-Oiler, M., Arciniega, G. M., & Tracey, T. J. (2011). Machismo and Mexican American men: An empirical understanding using a gay sample. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 358 –367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023122

Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., & Beautrais, A. L. (1999). Is sexual orientation related to mental health problems and suicidality in young people? Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 876 – 880. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1001/archpsyc.56.10.876

Fowler, J. W. (1981). Stages of faith: The psychology of human develop- ment and the quest for meaning. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Garfield, C. F., Isacco, A., & Sahker, E. (2013). Religion and spirituality as important components of men’s health and wellness: An analytic review. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 7, 27–37. http://dx.doi .org/10.1177/1559827612444530

Ghavami, N., Fingerhut, A., Peplau, L. A., Grant, S. K., & Wittig, M. A. (2011). Testing a model of minority identity achievement, identity affirmation, and psychological well-being among ethnic minority and sexual minority individuals. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 79 – 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022532

Gilman, S. E., Cochran, S. D., Mays, V. M., Hughes, M., Ostrow, D., & Kessler, R. C. (2001). Risk of psychiatric disorders among individuals reporting same-sex sexual partners in the National Comorbidity Survey. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 933–939. http://dx.doi.org/10 .2105/AJPH.91.6.933

Gnanaprakash, C. (2013). Spirituality and resilience among post-graduate university students. Journal of Health Management, 15, 383–396. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/0972063413492046

Gough, H. R., Wilks, S. E., & Prattini, R. J. (2010). Spirituality among alzheimer’s caregivers: Psychometric reevaluation of the Intrinsic Spir- ituality Scale. Journal of Social Service Research, 36, 278 –288. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2010.493848

Gubrium, A. C., & Torres, M. (2011). “S-T-R-8 up” Latinas: Affirming an alternative sexual identity. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 6, 281–305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2011.601956

Habarth, J. M. (2008). Thinking “straight”: Heteronormativity and asso- ciated outcomes across sexual orientation (Doctoral dissertation). Re- trieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (Order No. 3328835)

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

77SPIRITUALITY AND SEXUAL MINORITY IDENTITY

Haight, W. L. (1998). “Gathering the spirit” at First Baptist Church: Spirituality as a protective factor in the lives of African American children. Social Work, 43, 213–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sw/43.3 .213

Haldeman, D. C. (2002). Gay rights, patient rights: The implications of sexual orientation conversion therapy. Professional Psychology: Re- search and Practice, 33, 260 –264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028 .33.3.260

Halkitis, P. N., Mattis, J. S., Sahadath, J. K., Massie, D., Ladyzhenskaya, L., Pitrelli, K., . . . Cowie, S. E. (2009). The meanings and manifesta- tions of religion and spirituality among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults. Journal of Adult Development, 16, 250 –262. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10804-009-9071-1

Hamilton, C. J., & Mahalik, J. R. (2009). Minority stress, masculinity, and social norms predicting gay men’s health risk behaviors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 132–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0014440

Harari, E., Glenwick, D. S., & Cecero, J. J. (2014). The relationship between religiosity/spirituality and well-being in gay and heterosexual Orthodox Jews. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 17, 886 – 897. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2014.942840

Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2009). How does sexual minority stigma “get under the skin”? A psychological mediation framework. Psychological Bulle- tin, 135, 707–730. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016441

Henley, B. M. (2014). Level of spirituality on suicidal ideations (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses data- base. (Order No. 1542798)

Herek, G. M., Gillis, J. R., & Cogan, J. C. (1999). Psychological sequelae of hate-crime victimization among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 945–951. http://dx .doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.67.6.945

Hill, P. C., Pargament, K., Hood, R. W., McCullough, M. E., Swyers, J. P., Larson, D. B., & Zinnbauer, B. J. (2000). Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points of commonality, points of departure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 30, 51–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468- 5914.00119

Hodge, D. R. (2003). The Intrinsic Spirituality Scale. Journal of Social Service Research, 30, 41– 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J079v30n01_03

Hodge, D. R., & McGrew, C. C. (2004). Clarifying the distinctions and connections between spirituality and religion. Paper presented at the NACSW Convention Proceedings, Reston, VA.

Hourani, L. L., Williams, J., Forman-Hoffman, V., Lane, M. E., Weimer, B., & Bray, R. M. (2012). Influence of spirituality on depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and suicidality in active duty military personnel. Depression Research and Treatment, 2012, 425463. http://dx .doi.org/10.1155/2012/425463

Hsiao, Y. C., Wu, H. F., Chien, L. Y., Chiang, C. M., Hung, Y. H., & Peng, P. H. (2012). The differences in spiritual health between non-depressed and depressed nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21, 1736 –1745. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03962.x

Jackson, S. (2006). Gender, sexuality and heterosexuality: The complexity (and limits) of heteronormativity. Feminist Theory, 7, 105–121. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/1464700106061462

Johnson, T. (2000). Gay spirituality: The role of gay identity in the transformation of human consciousness. New York, NY: White Crane Institute.

Kashdan, T. B., & Nezlek, J. B. (2012). Whether, when, and how is spirituality related to well-being? Moving beyond single occasion questionnaires to understanding daily process. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1523–1535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0146167212454549

King, M., Semlyen, J., Tai, S. S., Killaspy, H., Osborn, D., Popelyuk, D., & Nazareth, I. (2008). A systematic review of mental disorder, suicide,

and deliberate self harm in lesbian, gay and bisexual people. BMC Psychiatry, 8, 70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-8-70

Kyle, J. (2013). Spirituality: Its role as a mediating protective factor in youth at risk for suicide. Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health, 15, 47– 67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19349637.2012.744620

Labbé, E. E., & Fobes, A. (2010). Evaluating the interplay between spirituality, personality and stress. Applied Psychophysiology and Bio- feedback, 35, 141–146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10484-009-9119-9

Lapinski, J., & McKirnan, D. (2013). Forgive me Father for I have sinned: The role of a Christian upbringing on lesbian, gay, and bisexual identity development. Journal of Homosexuality, 60, 853– 872. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/00918369.2013.774844

Leak, G. K. (2009). An assessment of the relationship between identity development, faith development, and religious commitment. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 9, 201–218. http://dx.doi .org/10.1080/15283480903344521

Lease, S. H., Horne, S. G., & Noffsinger-Frazier, N. (2005). Affirming faith experiences and psychological health for Caucasian lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 378 – 388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.3.378

Lick, D. J., Durso, L. E., & Johnson, K. L. (2013). Minority stress and physical health among sexual minorities. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 521–548. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691613497965

Lo, C., Lin, J., Gagliese, L., Zimmermann, C., Mikulincer, M., & Rodin, G. (2010). Age and depression in patients with metastatic cancer: The protective effects of attachment security and spiritual wellbeing. Ageing & Society, 30, 325–336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X09990201

Meadows, L. A., Kaslow, N. J., Thompson, M. P., & Jurkovic, G. J. (2005). Protective factors against suicide attempt risk among African American women experiencing intimate partner violence. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36(1–2), 109 –121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10464-005-6236-3

Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 674 – 697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033- 2909.129.5.674

Miller, W. R., & Thoresen, C. E. (2003). Spirituality, religion, and health. An emerging research field. American Psychologist, 58, 24 –35. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.24

Mock, S. E., & Eibach, R. P. (2012). Stability and change in sexual orientation identity over a 10-year period in adulthood. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 641– 648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011- 9761-1

Mohr, J. J., & Fassinger, R. E. (2000). Measuring dimensions of lesbian and gay male experience. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 66 –90.

Moleiro, C., Pinto, N., & Freire, J. (2013). Effects of age on spiritual well-being and homonegativity: Religious identity and practices among LGB persons in Portugal. Journal of Religion, Spirituality & Aging, 25, 93–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15528030.2012.741561

Nelson, C., Jacobson, C. M., Weinberger, M. I., Bhaskaran, V., Rosenfeld, B., Breitbart, W., & Roth, A. J. (2009). The role of spirituality in the relationship between religiosity and depression in prostate cancer pa- tients. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 38, 105–114. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1007/s12160-009-9139-y

Newcomb, M. E., & Mustanski, B. (2010). Internalized homophobia and internalizing mental health problems: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 1019 –1029. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr .2010.07.003

Oman, D. (2013). Religious and spirituality: Evolving meanings. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (2nd ed., pp. 23– 47). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Pagnini, F., Lunetta, C., Rossi, G., Banfi, P., Gorni, K., Cellotto, N., . . . Corbo, M. (2011). Existential well-being and spirituality of individuals

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

78 WRIGHT AND STERN

with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is related to psychological well-being of their caregivers. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Official Publication of the World Federation of Neurology Research Group on Motor Neuron Diseases, 12, 105–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17482968.2010 .502941

Paranjape, A., & Kaslow, N. (2010). Family violence exposure and health outcomes among older African American women: Do spirituality and social support play protective roles? Journal of Women’s Health, 19, 1899 –1904. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2009.1845

Pargament, K. I. (2002). The bitter and the sweet: An evaluation of the costs and benefits of religiousness. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 168 –181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1303_02

Plöderl, M. M., Kralovec, K. K., Fartacek, C. C., & Fartacek, R. R. (2010). Homosexuality as a risk factor for depression and suicidality among men. Facts and ignorance of facts. European Psychiatry, 25, 136.

Prior, J., & Cusack, C. M. (2009). Spiritual dimensions of self- transformation in Sydney’s gay bathhouses. Journal of Homosexuality, 57, 71–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00918360903445327

Ritter, K. Y., & Terndrup, A. I. (2002). Handbook of affirmative psycho- therapy with lesbians and gay men. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Rodgers, B. (1995). The Radical Faerie movement: A queer spirit pathway. Social Alternatives, 14, 34 –37.

Rodriguez, E. M., Lytle, M. C., & Vaughan, M. D. (2013). Exploring the intersectionality of bisexual, religious/spiritual, and political identities from a feminist perspective. Journal of Bisexuality, 13, 285–309. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/15299716.2013.813001

Rodriguez, E. M., & Ouellette, S. C. (2000). Gay and lesbian Christians: Homosexual and religious identity integration in the members and participants of a gay positive church. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 39, 333–347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0021-8294.00028

Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., & Hunter, J. (2004). Ethnic/racial dif- ferences in the coming-out process of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: A comparison of sexual identity development over time. Cultural Di- versity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10, 215–228. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/1099-9809.10.3.215

Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., & Hunter, J. (2008). Predicting different patterns of sexual identity development over time among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: A cluster analytic approach. American Journal of Community Psychology, 42(3– 4), 266 –282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10464-008-9207-7

Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., Hunter, J., & Braun, L. (2006). Sexual identity development among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youths: Consis- tency and change over time. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 46 –58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490609552298

Ross, M. W., & Rosser, B. R. (1996). Measurement and correlates of internalized homophobia: A factor analytic study. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 52, 15–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097- 4679(199601)52:1�15::AID-JCLP2�3.0.CO;2-V

Salas-Wright, C. P., Olate, R., & Vaughn, M. G. (2013). The protective effects of religious coping and spirituality on delinquency: Results among high-risk and gang-involved Salvadoran youth. Criminal Jus- tice and Behavior, 40, 988 –1008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0093854813482307

Sánchez, F. J., & Vilain, E. (2012). “Straight-acting gays”: The relationship between masculine consciousness, anti-effeminacy, and negative gay identity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 111–119. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1007/s10508-012-9912-z

Schneider, R. Z., & Feltey, K. M. (2009). “No matter what has been done wrong can always be redone right”: Spirituality in the lives of impris- oned battered women. Violence Against Women, 15, 443– 459. http://dx .doi.org/10.1177/1077801208331244

Smith, B., & Horne, S. (2007). Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered (GLBT) experiences with Earth-spirited faith. Journal of Homosexual- ity, 52, 235–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J082v52n03_11

Sorajjakool, S., Aja, V., Chilson, B., Ramirez-Johnson, J., & Earll, A. (2008). Disconnection, depression, and spirituality: A study of the role of spirituality and meaning in the lives of individuals with severe depression. Pastoral Psychology, 56, 521–532. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1007/s11089-008-0125-2

Szymanski, D., & Kashubeck-West, S. (2008). Mediators of the relation- ship between internalized oppressions and lesbian and bisexual women’s psychological distress. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 575–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011000007309490

Tan, P. P. (2005). The importance of spirituality among gay and lesbian individuals. Journal of Homosexuality, 49, 135–144. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1300/J082v49n02_08

Thoresen, C. E. (1999). Spirituality and health: Is there a relationship? Journal of Health Psychology, 4, 291–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 135910539900400314

Thumma, S. (1991). Negotiating a religious identity: The case of the gay evangelical. Sociology of Religion, 52, 333–347. http://dx.doi.org/10 .2307/3710850

Turner-Musa, J., & Lipscomb, L. (2007). Spirituality and social support on health behaviors of african american undergraduates. American Journal of Health Behavior, 31, 495–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.31 .5.5

Ungvarski, P. J., & Grossman, A. H. (1999). Health problems of gay and bisexual men. The Nursing Clinics of North America, 34, 313–331.

Visser, A., Garssen, B., & Vingerhoets, A. (2010). Spirituality and well- being in cancer patients: A review. Psycho-Oncology, 19, 565–572. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.1626

Walker, E. A. (2000). Spiritual support in relation to community violence exposure, aggressive outcomes, and psychological adjustment among inner city young adolescents. Dissertation Abstracts International: Sec- tion B: The Sciences and Engineering, 61(6), 3295.

Walker, J. (2012). Multiple identities: An examination of racial, religious and sexual identity for black men who have sex with men during emerging adulthood (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). City Univer- sity of New York, NY.

Woodford, M. R., Howell, M. L., Silverschanz, P., & Yu, L. (2012). “That’s so gay!”: Examining the covariates of hearing this expression among gay, lesbian, and bisexual college students. Journal of American College Health, 60, 429 – 434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2012 .673519

Wright, A. J., & Wegner, R. T. (2012). Homonegative microaggressions and their impact on LGB individuals: A measure validity study. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 6, 34 –54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 15538605.2012.648578

Yarhouse, M. A., & Tan, E. S. N. (2005). Addressing religious conflicts in adolescents who experience sexual identity confusion. Professional Psy- chology: Research and Practice, 36, 530 –536. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/0735-7028.36.5.530

Yip, A. K. (1997). Attacking the attacker: Gay Christians talk back. British Journal of Sociology, 48, 113–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/591913

Zinnbauer, B. J., Pargament, K. I., Cole, B., Rye, M. S., Butter, E. M., Belavich, T. G., . . . Kadar, J. L. (1997). Religion and spirituality: Unfuzzying the fuzzy. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36, 549 –564. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1387689

Received September 17, 2014 Revision received August 19, 2015

Accepted August 24, 2015 �

T hi

s do

cu m

en t

is co

py ri

gh te

d by

th e

A m

er ic

an P

sy ch

ol og

ic al

A ss

oc ia

ti on

or on

e of

it s

al li

ed pu

bl is

he rs

. T

hi s

ar ti

cl e

is in

te nd

ed so

le ly

fo r

th e

pe rs

on al

us e

of th

e in

di vi

du al

us er

an d

is no

t to

be di

ss em

in at

ed br

oa dl

y.

79SPIRITUALITY AND SEXUAL MINORITY IDENTITY