Psychometric validation and extension of the LGBT people of Color Microaggressions Scale with a sample of sexual minority BIPOC college students.

Abstract

Balsam et al., 2011) is a measure used to assess the insidious forms of discrimination, or microaggressions, sexual and gender minority Black and Indigenous people and people of color (BIPOC) experience in their daily lives. Despite its utility, the factor structure of the LGBT-PCMS has not been confirmed since its development. The present study examined the factorial validity of the LGBT-PCMS. In addition, three alternative sets of response categories based on other commonly utilized discrimination measures were explored. The three additional response categories examined frequency of microaggressions within the past year and across one's life, as well as participants' ratings of the stressfulness of the experience. The sample consisted of 314 sexual minority BIPOC college students (M age = 23.80) and was predominantly comprised of cisgender women (69%), African American/Black people (55%), and bisexual individuals (47%). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the fit of the original factor structure and the validity of the modified response categories. Bivariate correlations between the LGBT-PCMS scales and a measure of psychological distress provided evidence of construct validity. The findings provide further support for the psychometric validity and dimensionality of the original LGBT-PCMS, and it introduces three new ways to capture the intersectional forms of discrimination encountered by sexual minority BIPOC. Public Significance StatementThe current study provides further rigorous statistical support and evidence for researchers and clinicians to use the LGBT People of Color Microaggressions Scale. The study allows for more nuanced ways to capture the frequency (i.e., within the past year and lifetime) and appraisal of stress associated with intersectional forms of discrimination.

Development and validation of the LGBTQ+ POC Microaggressions Scale—Brief (LGBTQ+ PCMS-B).

“…The overall scale and three subscales of each measure met minimum reliability (α > .70). Both measures showed evidence for convergent, criterion-related, and incremental validity, which was consistent with previous research showing significant positive associations between intersectional stigma and negative mental health (McConnell et al, 2018; Ramirez & Galupo, 2019; Sutter & Perrin, 2016; Velez et al, 2019; Zelaya et al, 2021). As hypothesized, both measures were associated with depression and anxiety and also accounted for variance in these symptoms above and beyond the single-dimension measures of racism and heterosexism.…”

“…For example, the item “not having any LGBT people of color as positive role models” may be less relevant now because this population is more visible in the news, the media, and through social media platforms. It should be noted that a recent study with LGBTQ+ POC college students showed that the LGBTQ+ PCMS demonstrated the intended three-factor structure (Zelaya et al, 2021). The difference in the results of this study and the present study demonstrates the need to examine the factor structure of a measure across multiple samples to increase confidence in CFA findings.…”

“…The original validation study for the LGBT-PCMS identified a three-factor structure and demonstrated high internal consistency and evidence of construct validity for the overall measure and its subscales (Balsam et al, 2011). A recent study utilized confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to replicate the three-factor structure and found support for it (Zelaya et al, 2021). The authors also found additional support for the construct validity of the LGBT-PCMS and its subscales through showing that they have moderate to large positive correlations with a measure of psychological distress.…”

Centering the margins: A moderation study examining cisgender privilege among LGBTQ+ BIPoC college students facing intersectional microaggressions.

“…Relatedly, the latest APA guidelines for working with sexual minoritized groups highlight the importance of considering other forms of oppression impacting the individual (Nakamura et al, 2022). Both racism—systemic and individual oppression based one's membership to a racial or ethnic group (Perry, 2007) and heterosexism—systemic and individual oppression against anyone who is not heterosexual (Neisen, 1990)—are key intersectional systems considered in the literature for LGBTQ+ BIPoC (Balsam et al, 2011; Fattoracci et al, 2020; Jackson et al, 2020; Kulick et al, 2017; Nadal et al, 2015; Velez et al, 2019; Zelaya et al, 2021).…”

An examination of theory-based suicidal ideation risk factors in college students with multiple marginalized identities.

“…Among multiply marginalized groups, it is especially important to consider the additional threats to belonging that might occur even within the supposed safety of one’s own marginalized group (Gray et al, 2015; Pachankis, Clark, et al, 2020). For example, racism experienced within the LGBTQ+ community is linked to increased psychosocial stress among LGBTQ+ college students of color (Zelaya et al, 2021).…”