Miranda and Storms

modified Kinsey sexual orientation measure, with a 10-point scale ranging from 1= homosexual to 10= heterosexual.

Self-disclosure. Self-disclosure of sexual orientation, commonly referred to as "coming out," was assessed by a scale developed for this study. Endorsement of items on this measure specifies extent of self-disclosure in each of 38 life areas, including employment, religion, family, and education. Response categories were NA: "This area is not applicable to my life"; 1: "not out"; 2: "partly out"; and 3: "completely out." A composite self-disclosure score was derived by averaging scores over those areas applicable to the participant, with higher scores indicating more pervasive self-disclosure.

Ego strength. Ego strength, or the ability to adapt to the world in such a way as to derive satisfaction from living in it (Krech, Crutchfield, & Livson, 1974), was assessed by two items developed for this study. First, the participants' psychological well-being was assessed by a scale ranging from 1 = extremely displeased with most aspects of my life to 7=pleased with most aspects of my life. Second, psychological strength was assessed by a scale ranging from 1 = I have a lot of psychological problems at this point in my life to 7=I feel extremely psychologically strong and adjusted. These two items were averaged to form an index of ego strength.

Neurotic anxiety. The Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI), Form A (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1968) was used as a measure of neurotic anxiety. The neuroticism scale correlates (r = .77, p<.01) with the Manifest Anxiety Scale, and high scores generally reflect anxiety, emotional lability, instability, and worry. Typical items are "Do you often worry about things that you should not have done or said?" "Do you worry about awful things that might happen?" and "Are you troubled about feelings of inferiority?"

RESULTS

Study I tests two major hypotheses: (a) positive lesbian and gay identity will be related to positive psychological adjustment and (b) the use of two coping strategies-self-labeling and self-disclosure will be related to positive lesbian and gay identity.

The major variable in this study-lesbian and gay identitymay be viewed as a continuum, ranging from more to less

positive identity, or as a dichotomous variable forming two groups, those with a more positive identity and those with a more negative identity. To accommodate both views, both correlations and t tests will be reported for all analyses. For t-test analyses, a mean split of the lesbian and gay identity variable resulted in classification of 67 respondents as more positively identified (67%) and 34 as more negatively identified (34%). Those who were more positively identified did not differ significantly from those who were more negatively identified on any demographic variable; therefore, none of the demographic variables was considered in further analyses. Additionally, when analyses were performed separately by sex of participants, there were no significant differences.

Relationship of

Lesbian/Gay Identity

and Psychological Adjustment

Lesbian and gay identity was predicted to relate positively to psychological adjustment; those with a more positive identity were expected to be lower in neurotic anxiety, as measured by the neuroticism scale of the EPI, and higher in ego strength, as measured by perceived psychological well-being and sense of psychological strength, when compared with those with a more negative identity. The results of both correlational and t-test analyses supported this expectation. Means and standard deviations are presented in Table 1.

As predicted, lesbian and gay identity was reliably related to neurotic anxiety, r(98) .34, p<.001; those with a more positive identity reported significantly fewer symptoms of neurotic anxiety than did those with a more negative identity, t=2.44, p<.02. It should also be noted that the mean neuroticism score for more positively identified participants (9.4) is at the 50th percentile on normative scales (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1968). In contrast, the mean for the more negatively identified participants (12.1) is at the 70th percentile, which is generally considered indicative of pathological anxiety.

As predicted, lesbian and gay identity was also highly related to ego strength. Identity was positively related to participants' ego strength, r(96) = .69, p<.001; those with a more positive lesbian or gay identity reported significantly greater egostrength than did those with a more negative identity, t=6.6,

TABLE 1

Psychological Characteristics of Subjects With More Positive Versus More Negative Lesbian/Gay Identification

Characteristic Study I

More positive

n=67

More negative n=31

Neurotic anxiety

9.4

4.70

12.1

5.92

2.44

.02

Ego strength

9.0

1.24

6.9

1.98

6.60

<.001

Self-labeling*

2.0

1.15

3.6

1.59

5.44

Self-disclosure**

2.1

.42

1.7

.42

4.70

<.001 <.001

Study II

n=103

n=28

Neurotic anxiety

8.9

4.72

12.31

4.72

3.26

.001

Ego strength

8.6

1.25

7.27

1.91

3.46

.002

Self-labeling*

2.0

1.33

3.31

2.13

3.05

.005

Self-disclosure***

4.4

1.38

2.65

1.16

<.001

*Lower scores indicate greater self-labeling as homosexual.

**Higher scores indicate more self-disclosure.

***Scores on the revised self-disclosure scale are on a different scaling from those of study I and are not directly comparable.

JOURNAL OF COUNSELING & DEVELOPMENT SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1989 VOL. 68

p<.001. The prediction that positive lesbian and gay identification would be related to positive psychological adjustment was strongly supported by these analyses.

Relationship of Lesbian/Gay Identification and Coping Strategies

It was predicted that positive lesbian and gay identity would be related to the use of two coping strategies-self-labeling as a homosexual and self-disclosure of sexual orientation. This expectation was supported. Means and standard deviations are presented in Table 1. Identity reliably correlated with self-labeling as a homosexual, r(95) = .54, p<.001; those with a more positive lesbian or gay identity labeled themselves more as a homosexual than did those with a more negative identity, t(97) 5.44, p<.001. Similarly, identification was highly related to self-disclosure of sexual orientation, r(97) = .45, p<.001; those with a more positive lesbian or gay identity reported more pervasive self-disclosure than did those with a more negative identity, t(96)=4.7, p<.001. Thus, the prediction that the two coping strategies-self-labeling and self-disclosure-would be related to positive lesbian and gay identity was confirmed. Substantive Differences

Between More Positive Versus

More Negative Lesbian/Gay Identification

As previously discussed, a series of independent t tests indicated that those with a more positive lesbian or gay identity differ from those with a more negative identity in psychological adjustment and coping styles. When relying solely on tests of significance, however, one runs the risk of overlooking the distinction between statistically significant and substantially meaningful findings. Therefore, a discriminant analysis was performed to ascertain the meaningfulness of these variables in discriminating between those with a more positive lesbian or gay identify from those with a more negative identity.

Results of the discriminant analysis revealed that the two psychological variables (neurotic anxiety and ego strength) and the two coping strategies (self-labeling and self-disclosure) differentiate those who are more positively lesbian or gay identified from those who are more negatively identified. The Wilks's lambda for this discriminant function is .55, with an associated chi-square (df=5) of 54.2, p<.001. Additionally, Rc2 is .67, indicating that 67% of the variance in the discriminant function was explained by the positive-negative lesbian and gay identification distinction.

The standardized coefficients (relative magnitude of contribution of each variable when all other variables are used) and the structure coefficients (correlation of each variable with the discriminant function) provide a measure of the relative importance of each variable in discriminating those with a positive lesbian or gay identity from those with a negative identity. Both are presented in Table 2. Although ego strength, self-labeling, and self-disclosure provide the largest unique contribution to the discrimination, all of the variables are substantially correlated with the function.

In summary, results from the discriminant function analysis strongly support the contention that neurotic anxiety, ego strength, self-labeling as a homosexual, and self-disclosure of sexual orientation are substantially meaningful variables for discriminating between more positively and more negatively lesbianand gay-identified participants. Furthermore, all of these variables are related to the underlying differences between the two groups.

Psychological Adjustment of Lesbians and Gay Men TABLE 2

Standardized and Structured Coefficients for Discriminant Function Analysis

Characteristic Neurotic anxiety Ego strength Self-disclosure Self-labeling

Standardized canonical discriminant coefficients

.075

.685

.42

.49

Unique Contribution of Coping Strategies to Psychological Adjustment

Structure coefficients

-.30

.73

.52

-.62

The two coping strategies-self-labeling and self-disclosureare proposed to facilitate positive lesbian or gay identity. Furthermore, the coping strategies are proposed to relate to psychological adjustment only through their relationship to identity. To determine whether the coping strategies are related to neuroticism and ego strength apart from their relationship to lesbian or gay identity, a series of partial correlations were conducted to ascertain the relationship between the coping strategies and psychological adjustment after statistically removing their association to identity.

The results of the partial correlational analyses are presented in Table 3. As can be seen, self-labeling is related to the psychological adjustment variables of both neurotic anxiety and ego strength. The relationship between self-labeling and both psychological adjustment variables, however, approaches zero after the association with lesbian and gay identity is statistically removed.

Self-disclosure is also related to both psychological adjustment variables. The relationship between self-disclosure and both psychological adjustment variables, however, approaches zero after the association with lesbian and gay identification is statistically removed.

In summary, the coping strategies do not uniquely contribute to psychological adjustment apart from their association with lesbian and gay identification.

Participants

METHOD: STUDY II

Participants in Study II were contacted through a gay and lesbian service organization affiliated with a large, midwestern university. Members were told that lesbians and gay men were

TABLE 3

Partial Correlation of Coping Strategies and Psychological Adjustment, Controlling for Lesbian/Gay Identification

Self-labeling

Coping strategies

n=99

Psychological adjustment Neurotic anxiety Ego strength n=99

Pearson correlation Partial correlation Self-disclosure

-.15

.06

.35

-.03

.03

<.001 ns

Pearson correlation Partial correlation

-.16

.05

.29

-.02

.02

JOURNAL OF COUNSELING & DEVELOPMENT SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1989 VOL. 68

2 82 82

333336

1226

.002

3333