2018
DOI: 10.1080/10538720.2018.1517398
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual religiosity across the life span: Associations with group identification and identity salience

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Gender and sexual identity. SGMs may experience RS, minority stress, and resilience differently depending on their specific sexual and gender identities (Barringer, 2020;Scroggs & Faflick, 2019). Often, research on sexual minorities is presumed to apply to gender minorities without a substantive representation of gender minorities in this work (Moradi et al, 2016).…”
Section: Rs Identity Saliencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gender and sexual identity. SGMs may experience RS, minority stress, and resilience differently depending on their specific sexual and gender identities (Barringer, 2020;Scroggs & Faflick, 2019). Often, research on sexual minorities is presumed to apply to gender minorities without a substantive representation of gender minorities in this work (Moradi et al, 2016).…”
Section: Rs Identity Saliencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taken together, these findings suggest that males, and more specifically gay and bisexual males, may be affected disproportionality by conflict between religiosity/spirituality and their identities. This may be due to the differences in religiosity found by authors, such as Scroggs and Faflick (2018) and Sherkat (2002). There is also a possibility that gender differences on conflict might be connected to differences on LGB identity dimensions, namely, the fact that (cisgender) Portuguese men have previously reported more difficulties in their process of accepting their LGB identity, more dissatisfaction with their identity and more sensibility to stigma (Oliveira et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Additional Measures. In Sample 2A, the only additional measures that participants completed were demographics and a measure of connection to the LGBT+ community (adapted from Scroggs & Faflick, 2018).…”
Section: Procedures and Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%