In this article, the author presents an overview of the qualitative research approach termed grounded

No abstract

This article outlines the preliminary validation of a new, inclusive model of sexual minority identity formation (McCarn & Fassinger, 1996) on a sample of gay men. The model hypothesizes two separate but reciprocal processes of individual sexual identity development and group membership identity development in a four-phase developmental sequence. The model was developed and successfully validated on a sample of lesbians (briefly described here), and the present study replicates and extends this work, using a modified Q-sort methodology, on a sample of 34 diverse gay men. Results indicated support for the model, in terms of both individual and group processes as well as phases, and suggested that the model is applicable to gay men. Implications of the study for theory, research, and practice are discussed.

This lead article of the special issue discusses conceptual and methodological considerations in studying sexual minority issues, particularly in research conducted by counseling psychologists (including the work represented in this special issue). First, the overarching challenge of conceptualizing and defining sexual minority populations is described. Second, the importance and value of scholarship about sexual minority issues are highlighted. Third, challenges in sexual minority research are outlined, using the articles in this special issue for illustrative purposes, and suggestions are offered for consideration in future research. Finally, the article concludes with a discussion of the ways in which counseling psychologists are uniquely positioned to advance knowledge, practice, and social justice through research on sexual minority issues.

Sexual minorities-typically classifi ed into the four categories of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people-face common struggles with societal oppression related to their sexual minority status, and they therefore face similar diffi culties in developing positive individual identities and healthy communities within that context of oppression. The increasingly frequent addition of "T" to "LGB" speaks to the public-and professionalconfl ation of all sexual minority concerns under a shared umbrella of invisibility, isolation, and discrimination. However, there are particular dimensions of experience that differentiate these four sexual minority groups in important ways, shaping group-specifi c trajectories for the development and enactment of identity (for the purposes of this discussion, we refer to these as betweengroup differences). Moreover, the sociocultural context for sexual minority identity-related experiences is complicated by diverse demographic locations 19