|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Religiosity, Gay Identity Affirmation, and Outness in a Sample of New York Same-Sex Attracted Men |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
Jones II, Vincent Alexander (著)
|
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2020.01 |
|---|
| ページ | 97 |
|---|
| 出版者 | Columbia University |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
https://www.columbia.edu/
|
|---|
| 出版地 | New York, NY, US [紐約, 紐約州, 美國] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 博碩士論文=Thesis and Dissertation |
|---|
| 言語 | 英文=English |
|---|
| 学位 | 博士 |
|---|
| 学校 | Columbia University |
|---|
| 学部・学科名 | Teachers College |
|---|
| 指導教官 | Sonali Rajan; Barbara C Wallace |
|---|
| 卒業年 | 2020 |
|---|
| 抄録 | This study aimed to investigate how "outness," spirituality/religiosity, gay identity affirmation and demographic factors relate to each other and predict internalized homophobia (IH). IH is linked to a host of negative outcomes. The study took place over three months at the 2012 New York Pride parades in all five boroughs. Participants were recruited via the cross-sectional street-intercept approach, 195 of whom met the inclusion criteria. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26. In sum, the sample consisted of a highly educated, mostly white, high-income subset of men. The regression model indicated that gay identity importance and being “out” to world were predictive of IH. There were also significant differences in participation in gay activities along the lines of education and race. Same sex attracted men who earned a four-year college degree reported more participation in gay activities compared to those of lower attainment levels. Compared to White men, Latino men participated in less gay activities, possibly due to cultural factors. Men who have higher levels of affirmation were more likely to participated in gay activities, which could include pride, which suggests a potential bias. Buddhists reported unusually high levels of internalized homophobia compared to other spiritual and religious practices and orientations.
Finally, there were no significant differences in homophobia with race, but there was one with religion. Christians exhibited statistically significantly higher levels of internalized homophobia compared to those who were nonreligious namely atheists, agnostics, and the spiritual but not religious. Implications for health promotion were discussed. |
|---|
| 目次 | Abstract i
Dedication iii
Acknowledgements iv
I - Introduction 1
Background and Context 1
Spirituality and Religion 1
Spiritual but Not Religious in America 2
The Historical Underpinnings 2
Spirituality and Sexual Minorities 4
Why Study Spirituality and Religion in Public Health 5
Spirituality and Religion as Adaptive Coping 5
Religion, Law and Policy Implications for Sexual Minorities 5
Implications for Practice 7
Gap in the Literature 8
Significance of Study 8
Research Aims 9
Definitions of Terms 10
II - Literature Review 12
Introduction 12
Sexual Minority Identity Development 14
Sexual Minority Identity and Spiritual Identity 15
LGB Identity Integration and Religion 18
LGB Identities and Organized Religion 19
Gap in the Literature 22
III - Methods 23
Research Design 23
Sampling Frame and Eligibility Criteria 24
Procedures 24
Demographic Characteristics 25
Measures 25
Outness inventory 25
Spiritual Experience Index-Revised 26
Gay Identity Affirmation/Self-Homophobia Subscales 27
Data Analysis 27
IV - Results 28
Response rate 28
Missing Data 28
Data Analysis 30
Results 31
Aim 1: What are the characteristics of NYC same-sex-attracted men in terms of age, race religion, and sexual
attraction 31
Frequencies 32
Aim 2: What are their levels of 1) spiritual support and openness, 2) gay identity affirmation and 3) outness in the
sample of urban same-sex-attracted men? 35
Spiritual Support and Openness 35
Gay Identity Affirmation 35
Outness Inventory 36
Aim 3: How are urban same-sex attracted men's reported spiritual support and spiritual openness, gay-identity
affirmation and outness related to each other? 36
Outness 37
Correlations between measures of outness 38
Self-Homophobia 38
Aim 4: To What Extent are Religion, Age, Race, Educational Attainment, Gay
Identity Affirmation Predictive of Self-Homophobia? 38
Assumptions 39
Hypotheses 39
Omnibus F-test hypotheses 39
Partial F-test hypotheses 40
Multiple Regression Analysis 40
Omnibus F-test 41
Variance Inflation Factor 45
Demographic Characteristics 45
Race 46
Religion 46
Income 46
"Outness" 47
Aim 5: What are the Differences in Internalized Homophobia Scores Between Race and Religion? 47
Hypothesis Testing 48
Race and Internalized Homophobia 48
Religion and Internalized Homophobia 49
T-Tests 50
Gay Activity 51
V – Discussion 54
Summary of Key Findings 54
Demographics 55
Future Research 63
Implications for Health Promotion 65
Limitations 67
References 68
Appendix 74
Appendix A - Survey Instrument 74
List of Tables
1. Characteristics of Participants 31
2. Self Homonegativity by Sociodemographic Factors 34
3. Correlations between Spiritual Openness and Support, Gay Identity Affirmation, and Outness 37
4. ANOVA Table; Omnibus F-Test 42
5. Model Summary 43
6. Regression Coefficients Table 44
7. Leven’s Test of Equality of Error Variances 49
8. Kruskal-Wallis Test (Ranks and Test Statistics) 49
9. Summary of Significant Differences Compared to Christians 51
10. Levene’s Test of Equality of Variances: Gay Activity Participation and
Educational Attainmen |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.7916/d8-9wtv-nd55 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 38 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2023.05.08 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2024.06.03 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
