Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Ego-dystonic sexual orientation wikipedia , lookup
Female promiscuity wikipedia , lookup
Homosexuality wikipedia , lookup
Sexual attraction wikipedia , lookup
Body odour and sexual attraction wikipedia , lookup
Gay pornography wikipedia , lookup
Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women wikipedia , lookup
LGBT stereotypes wikipedia , lookup
Homosexuality in society wikipedia , lookup
Gender advertisement wikipedia , lookup
Gender roles in non-heterosexual communities wikipedia , lookup
The report committee for Josh Craig Rainey Certifies that this is the approved version of the following report: Minority Stress, Gender Role Strain, and Visibility Management: Causes and Concerns of Body Dissatisfaction among Gay Men APPROVED BY SUPERVISING COMMITTEE: Supervisor:_________________________________________ Deborah Tharinger _________________________________________ Alissa Sherry Minority Stress, Gender Role Strain, and Visibility Management: Causes and Concerns of Body Dissatisfaction among Gay Men by Josh Craig Rainey, B.A. Report Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts The University of Texas at Austin December 2011 Minority Stress, Gender Role Strain, and Visibility Management: Causes and Concerns of Body Dissatisfaction among Gay Men by Josh Craig Rainey, M.A. The University of Texas at Austin, 2011 SUPERVISOR: Deborah Tharinger Body dissatisfaction is a growing problem in the gay male population, with serious implications for psychological and social well-being. Gay men tend to be at higher risk of body dissatisfaction than their heterosexual counterparts. They report lower levels of body satisfaction and have higher rates of risky behaviors such as anabolic steroid use, eating disorders, and over-exercising (Gil, 2007; Willoughby et al., 2008; Kaminski et al., 2004). It is difficult to determine the cause of this issue in the gay community; however, two theories have been proposed to help explain this phenomenon. Minority stress theory posits that it relates to added stress involved with being part of a minority group. Gender role strain theory identifies these concerns with the strain to conform to masculine gender roles. A common link to bridge the two theories together may be visibility management, which is the way gay men carefully disclose behaviors that would identify their sexual orientation (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003). The proposed method will include participants that will be approximately 130 gay men 18-23 years of age. Participants will be sought through online collection from universities in the United States. Participants will respond to empirically validated measures in regards to Minority Stress, Gender Role Strain, Visibility Management, and Body Dissatisfaction to help determine if what links there are between these variables. iii Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………1 Integrative Analysis………………………………………………………………………6 Body Image……………………………………..…………………………………6 Body Dissatisfaction………………………………………..……………………12 Theoretical Causes of Body Dissatisfaction……………………………………..18 Proposed Research Study………………………………………………………………...24 Statement of Problem…………………………………………………………….24 Statement of Purpose…………………………………………………………….26 Research Questions and Hypotheses…………………………………………………….27 Method………………...…………………………………………………………33 Participants……………………………………………………………………….33 Measures……..…….…………………….………………………………………33 Procedures…………………………………………………..……………………38 Data Analysis and Expected Results……………………………………………………40 Full Model………………………………………………..………………………47 Equal Paths Model………………………………….……………………………48 Discussion………………………………………………………………………………..49 Limitations and Strengths………………………………..………………………52 Implications………………………………………………………………………55 Final Statement………………………………………………………………......56 iv Appendices…………………………...…………………………………………………..58 References.……………………………………………………………………………….73 v Introduction Body dissatisfaction, specifically dissatisfaction concerning the weight and the shape of the body, has been identified as a common experience for women for several decades (Grabe, Ward, & Hyde, 2008). Only in recent years has the attention of research transitioned from women’s bodies to men’s bodies. Current evidence suggests a possible increase in the objectification of the ideal male body, as seen in the increased use of young, lean, muscular male models in advertisements and media (Pope, Olivardia, Borowiecki, & Cohane, 2001). As the number of pictures in popular magazines emphasizing the ideal male aesthetic has increased, the average level of body dissatisfaction has also increased in the male population, showing a correlation between media emphasis on the male body and body dissatisfaction. (Farquhar & Wasylkiw, 2007). Given the growing discrepancy between current male body image ideals and the actual size and weight of the average man (Leit, Pope, & Gray,2001), research suggests that men are beginning to experience the negative effects of the impossible media portrayal women have traditionally experienced (Ata, Ludden, & Lally, 2007). Although there is likely considerable variability in the definition of the ideal male body, the current marketing ideal is typically a mesomorphic v-shaped body exhibiting broad shoulders, a developed chest, a flat defined stomach, and narrow hips. Additionally, the media prescribed male body image places very little emphasis on the lower body (Pope Gruber, Mangweth, Bureau, deCol, & Jouvent, 2000). 1 As this ideal body image has become more commonly displayed and more drastic, it has also become increasingly difficult to achieve. Men’s desires to make their bodies look like the ideal image as perpetrated by the media may result in the use of unhealthy means. Much like with women, men’s body dissatisfaction has been linked to a variety of negative consequences and unhealthy behaviors. Body dissatisfaction in men increases the risk of developing an eating disorder, such as anorexia and bulimia, and also increases the likelihood of having an obsession with exercise (Ousley, Crdero, & White, 2008). Whereas women tend to over-exercise in order to maintain the perception of health, men typically over-exercise to change their body image. Unlike the tendency of women with body dissatisfaction to focus almost exclusively on weight loss, men appear to feel the need to both lose fat in order to become lean, and to put on muscle mass to achieve the ideal muscularity (Ousley, Crdero, & White). The tendency of men to focus on muscularity in their exercise can increase the risk of muscle dsymorphia, a form of body dysmorphic disorder that involves a pathological preoccupation with muscularity, which is typically only seen in the male population (McDonald, & Thompson, 1990; Olivardia, Pope, & Hudson, 2000). Attempts to gain muscle and improve body-esteem can also add an increased risk of anabolic-androgenic steroid abuse (Hildebrandt, Langenbucher, Carr, Sanjuan, & Park, 2006). In addition to the physical effects and risks in men, body dissatisfaction also carries risks for psychological distortions, disorders, and negative consequences. Men with “muscle belittlement” have the belief that their muscles are smaller than what they 2 really are and have higher risk for depression and low self-esteem. Furthermore, because these men are at risk for eating disorders, exercise disorders, and performance-enhancing drug abuse, they are consequently at increased risk for depression and low body-esteem. Physical risks may lead to additional psychological risks and vice versa, causing a vicious cycle of physical and psychological pathologies (Olivardia, Pope, Borowiecki, & Cohane, 2004). Although body dissatisfaction and the associated risks can affect all men, gay men tend to be at a higher risk for body dissatisfaction and its associated consequences than heterosexual men. Gay men self report lower levels of satisfaction with their bodies than their heterosexual counterparts, both in regard to weight and muscularity (Gil, 2007). Even when levels of body dissatisfaction are controlled for, gay men report greater use of anabolic steroids than heterosexual men (Willoughby, Lai, Doty, & Mackey, 2008), and additionally, are at an increased risk for eating disorders and over-exercising (Kaminski, Chapman, Haynes, & Own, 2004). The prescribed ideal male body in the gay community is similar to that among heterosexual males, with an emphasis on lean muscularity, small hips, a large chest, flat abdominal muscles, and a large penis (Martins, Tiggemann, & Churchett, 2008), yet gay men experience a greater risk of body dissatisfaction than heterosexual men. Many argue that this difference results from the gay subculture’s emphasis on physical appearance and objectification of other men as well as the self (Kozak, Frankenhauser, & Roberts, 2009). In fact, some research suggests that striving for ideal attractiveness is a 3 commonplace trend of the gay community. Men, both gay and heterosexual, place greater emphasis on appearance than do women, both for themselves and their potential mates, though for gay men, this creates a unique emphasis on themselves having an ideal body as a member of the gay community, as well as, for attracting a mate (Siever, 1994; Tiggemann, Martins, & Kirkbride, 2007). There are several theoretical models that attempt to describe why gay men experience greater risk as it relates to body image. Both the minority stress model and gender role strain theory attempt to describe the cause of body dissatisfaction in gay men (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005; Martins, Tiggemann, & Churchette, 2008). Visibility management is a third construct that will be used to determine if there are common links between minority stress and gender role strain. The minority stress model has several applications across a diversity of minority groups such as those defined by race, religion , or sexual orientation (Rostosky, Riggle, Gray, & Hatton, 2007). Kimmel and Mahalik (2005) use the minority stress model to suggest that gay men may have particular stress in three categories that lead to body dissatisfaction: internalized homophobia, stigma, and anti-gay physical attacks (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005). The gender role strain paradigm is a competing theory that Martins, Tiggemann, and Churchette (2008) stated that proposes that body dissatisfaction is a function of the amount that a man invests in traditional masculine norms. Societal stereotypes suggest that gay men are less masculine, and individual’s endorsement of this attitude can cause 4 gender role strain in gay men. One effect of this on these men is in the development of body image and body dissatisfaction (Martins, Tiggemann, & Churchette, 2008). Both theories show merit in explaining body dissatisfaction in gay men, though they may not be adequate in exposing the root of the problem. Visibility management refers to a process by which individuals regulate the degree to which they disclose traits or characteristics that would otherwise be inconspicuous. In the gay community, this can refer to how well a person can conceal their homosexuality from people of their choosing (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003). Visibility management can be expanded to encapsulate other constructs of the gay community; in particular, body dissatisfaction may be affected by visibility in the gay community indirectly. Those who are highly visible may have higher rates of body dissatisfaction than those that are not as visible. This difference may be due to additional amounts of minority stress and pressure to conform to socially prescribed masculine traits that accompany greater visibility in the gay community. The proposed study seeks to investigate the relationship between the minority stress model, gender role strain theory, and visibility management as it pertains to body dissatisfaction within the gay male community. This study asks: Does minority stress predict body dissatisfaction in gay men? Does gender role strain predict body dissatisfaction in gay men? Is visibility management a common cause of both minority stress and gender role strain and, therefore an indirect cause of body dissatisfaction for gay men? 5 Integrative Analysis Body Image Past Research Trends Body image has been explored by researchers for decades (Schooler & Ward , 2006). However, the research has primarily dealt with women; only recently has research explored the relationship between body image and men. Research examining body image inmen and women commonly focuses on height, weight, and fitness ideals, in addition to the negative effect that body image can have on the individual. However, since there are differences between men and women, there also needs to be differences in the way that we study body images between men and women. If we were to examine specific body image factors for women, we might find that dress size, lip shape and size, hair color, skin softness, and other various variables are crucial to how women perceive body image. In contrast, with men, the research might focus on different factors, such as amount of hair, sweat production, muscularity, and penis size. With this in mind, it would be impossible to generalize findings from previous research on women’s body image to men (Schooler & Ward, 2006). It is important to measure the specific trends that that men have toward their body in the current study. Reasons Why Men have Body Dissatisfaction Women’s concerns with their body image has been apparent for decades, and the concern over negative psychological effects of women’s body image has been well studied, however, is there a need to study the body image of men? Why would men 6 suffer from body dissatisfaction? Is it similar to women? Is it distinct? Farquhar and Waslykiw (2007) suggest that media images play an important role in how negative trends about the body surface in both men and women. They have shown that there are an increasing number of body images of men in popular men’s magazines such as Sports Illustrated that focus on aesthetics of the body as opposed to those that focus on performance of the body. This trend is positively correlated with men’s body dissatisfaction, as the more aesthetic the images become, the more body dissatisfaction the participants tend to feel (Farquhar & Waslykiw, 2007). However, media is not the only influence in the development of men’s body image. Goldenberg, McCoy, and Greenberg (2000) studied the role of appearance monitoring and social comparisons that men make. They found that men who monitor their appearance more tend to also have more body dissatisfaction. Likewise, Hozba and Walker (2007) found that comparing one’s self to others tends to have the same effect on men as on women, meaning that the more comparisons that men make to other men, the more likely they will have higher levels of body dissatisfaction. A generalization of this finding is that time spent thinking about body image positively correlates with higher levels of body dissatisfaction (Goldenberg, McCoy, & Greenberg, 2000; Hozba, Walker, Yakushko, & Peugh, 2007). General Body Image Ideals in Men Now that we know how men can come to be dissatisfied with their body, it is important to understand what specifically causes body dissatisfaction. In order to determine what causes body dissatisfaction, we need to first understand what the ideal 7 body image is for men. Frederick et al. (2007) found through the 71% of men did not believe that they had their ideal body image. The primary concern of men in the study was muscularity as opposed to fat, meaning that men tended to want more muscle mass and less fat in order to feel they had reached their ideal body image (Frederick, Buchanan, Sadehgi-Azar, Peplau, Haselton, & Berezovskaya, 2007). Smolak, Murnen, and Thompson (2005) also found that muscularity was a primary concern of adolescent boys’ body image standards. The researchers found that boys with more parental, peer, and media pressures about achieving the ideal body were more likely to go to extra lengths to gain muscularity with food supplements or steroid use. Both supplement and steroid users tended to have higher body dissatisfaction and depression, indicating that pursuing this body image ideal can come with a price (Smolak, Murnen, & Thompson, 2005). Specific Body Image Ideals in Men In addition to muscularity there are many specific body areas that men focus on when it comes to body image ideals. One such area that is specifically unique to men is the penis. This particular area of the body receives high amounts of media, peer, and relational attention regarding what the ideal penis should be like. Lever, Frederick, and Paplau (2006) studied this specific body image concern among men, and found that 45% of men were not satisfied with the size (length and width) of their penis. These men indicated that a larger than average penis would be ideal for them, which may be generalized into a confidence characteristic (Lever, Frederick, & Paplau, 2006). This is 8 one of only a few body parts that could be considered unique to men; however, it is not the only one determinate of an ideal image. Martins, Tiggemann, and Churchett (2008) explored the impact of several specific parts of the body (lips, thighs, eyes, etc.) and concluded that head hair, body hair, height, and penis size were the four that were perceived to be the most important to men with regard to body image. Head hair style and thickness, lower amounts of body hair, height, and large penis size were all perceived as being ideal. Muscle definition was also perceived to be important (Martins, Tiggemann, & Churchett, 2008). Schooler and Ward (2006) looked at the impact of “real” body characteristics, as compared to ideal body characteristics, on the body image of men. Real body characteristics are the functions or parts of the body that are functional yet socially unattractive. Some might consider the absence of these characteristics ideal. Examples of these characteristics include body hair and sweat. Those participants that were uncomfortable with these aspects of the “real body”, were more likely to be less assertive and have greater levels of body dissatisfaction (Schooler & Ward, 2006). Thus, there are many features that factor into an ideal body image for men. In general the literature suggests that a mesomorphic v-shaped body that is tall and lean with large and defined muscles, a stylish and thick head hair, low amounts of body hair, and a large penis are the most dominant characteristics of the ideal body image for men. 9 Real and Ideal Body Discrepancies We now have a picture of what men want their bodies to look like. It is also important to understand what their bodies actually look like compared to how they are perceived to look like. One of the most important components of studying ideal body image is understanding the discrepancy between ideology and reality. Hobza, Walker, Yakushko, and Peugh (2007) found that media images create a form of body dissatisfaction that is explained through the discrepancies of the perception of the models in the photos and the perceived body image of the research participant. The discrepancy was strongest when looking at muscularity, where the raters rated the models as more muscular than they actually were, and rated themselves as less muscular than they actually were, thus creating large discrepancies in what they perceived (Hozba, Walker, Yakushko, & Peugh, 2007). Additional studies have shown that men may know that it is unreasonable or even impossible to attain certain body characteristic changes, yet men still idealize these changes. Schooler and Ward (2006) looked at “real” body characteristics (body hair, sweat, acne, etc.) and found that some men believed that there was no way to change these aspects of their body and that they provide a necessary bodily function. Yet these men still found the “real” body characteristics to be uncomfortable to talk about and continued their illogical idealization for change (Schooler & Ward, 2006). This study showed that even though men may believe their ideologies are unattainable, they still continue to focus on the discrepancies between their actual bodies and what is idealized. 10 Effects of Discrepancies Looking in more detail, we find that there are different types of idealization that men can have. The discrepancies between various types of ideals contribute to different effects on men. Farquhar and Waslykiw (2007) found that viewing images that form discrepancies in performance traits (such as sports characteristics) led to a more positive self evaluation and less discrepancy between the research participant and the model than actually existed. In other words, men overestimated their actual performance image. This is in contrast to how the viewing of images of aesthetic traits contributed to negative self evaluations and greater discrepancies than were actually there, indicating that men underemphasize their actual aesthetic qualities in comparison to those of the model being viewed (Farquhar & Waslykiw, 2007). Research shows that there are different types of ideals and that ideals in and of themselves may actually have positive effects under certain conditions; however, there appears to be something specific about aesthetic ideals that create discord and may be accompanied by psychological costs. Research also suggests that the ideals for certain body parts may be illogical. Lever, Frederick, and Peplau (2006) found that 45% of men believed their penis to be unsatisfactory, while only 15% of their companions (both male or female) found that their penis size was unsatisfactory (Lever, Frederick, & Paplau, 2006). This study shows that the discrepancy between perceived body image and ideal body image may be more than just physical, and in this case may relate to confidence and assertiveness as well. 11 Discrepancy between Gay and Heterosexual Men Having established that men are concerned with their perceptions of body images, research indicates that gay men show greater concern with body dissatisfaction than heterosexual men. Tiggemann, Martins, and Kirkbride (2007) found that while both heterosexual and gay men wanted to be thinner and more muscular, gay men had significantly more body dissatisfaction than heterosexual men. They also found that large discrepancies between ideal body image and actual body image lead to greater correlations with negative self-esteem in gay men than heterosexual men (Tiggemann, Martins, & Kirkbride, 2007). Their study suggests that both gay men and heterosexual men experience body dissatisfaction, but that gay men tend to experience more dissatisfaction and more negative effects. Similarly, Seiver (1994) found that gay men are the most likely to experience body dissatisfaction and eating disorders out of three groups: gay men, lesbian women, and heterosexual men. (Seiver, 1994). This study provides additional evidence that gay men experience more body dissatisfaction than heterosexual men and lesbians, as well, suggesting that being part of a homosexual subgroup is not the only reason that gay men are at increased risk for experiencing high levels of body dissatisfaction. 12 Body Dissatisfaction Body Dissatisfaction is Psychological We have now seen that body dissatisfaction is common among men, and that it is prevalent in higher levels among gay men. Now we will explore what body dissatisfaction is, what it means to men, and how it affects their lives. The construct of body dissatisfaction is not easily defined as it is a broad construct that relates to many concerns men have about their bodies and is related to many negative effects that it has on them. At first glance one might believe that body dissatisfaction mainly deals with physical complaints about one’s body, however, we find that body dissatisfaction can be defined as something much more psychologically grounded. Brannan and Petrie (2008) suggest that body dissatisfaction is correlated with psychologically and socially prescribed factors, including perfectionism, neuroticism, and social desirability, indicating that body dissatisfaction can be moderated by numerous variables, many of which are socially prescribed (Brannan, & Petrie, 2008). The association between body dissatisfaction and these socially prescribed constructs is not surprising considering the amount of evidence previously presented that links body dissatisfaction with media trends and social comparison. The Vicious Cycle of Social Comparison Often body dissatisfaction is influenced not by complaints of one’s own body, but what they perceive others complaints are about their body, such as wanting to look good in front of others or trying to fit into a body image norm. Trampe, Staple, and Siero 13 (2007) suggest that this can lead to a vicious cycle. Results of their study indicate that body dissatisfaction can increase when exposed to situations of social comparisons. The cycle is then perpetuated as people with body dissatisfaction tend to be more prone to social comparisons (Trampe, Staple, & Siero, 2007). This cycle may be something that is very difficult to break since changing one’s body image may not occur after the amount of social pressure one feels or the psychological roots that have caused the body dissatisfaction. Negative Effects of Body Dissatisfaction Since we have seen some of the common roots, causes, and moderators of body dissatisfaction, we now need to understand the negative effects body dissatisfaction has on a person. The root of body dissatisfaction may lie within the mind; however, its negative effects are not limited to that area alone. Unfortunately, body dissatisfaction can lead to extreme mental consequences and physical behaviors that are damaging to both the mind and body. When a person wants to tone up or lose weight a healthy option might be to exercise or change poor eating habits in order to be healthier. However, as we have already learned one of the effects of body dissatisfaction is that it increases the frequency and intensity of social comparisons, which in turn causes higher levels of body dissatisfaction. When levels of body dissatisfaction reach a critical point, we see some of the extreme and dangerous behaviors begin to emerge. 14 Obsession One of the most significant negative effects of body dissatisfaction is an obsession over body image, due to the fact that it can cause a viscous cycle. Papayani (2005) argues that cultural, historical, and social forces have created a socially-mandated need for body obsession. Western society has placed such an emphasis on body image as exhibited in the media that one cannot avoid the large focus on body image. Obsession is believed to be the first step in the negative effects that body dissatisfaction can have on people (Papayani, 2005). This indicates that thinking about one’s body is in some ways unavoidable; however, when it is thought about enough it becomes an obsession. This obsession over one’s appearance is what begins the behaviors to change the body image. Eating Disorders Eating disorders may be one of the most studied aspects of body dissatisfaction; however, again research of this topic related to men seems to have only just recently begun. It may seem logical that eating disorders are more common among men with body dissatisfaction and Brannan and Petrie (2008) would agree. Their study found that body dissatisfaction was strongly related to eating disorders. Body dissatisfaction accounted for 16-26% of the variance for why men have disordered eating. Likewise, they found that higher levels of body dissatisfaction were paired with higher levels of disturbed eating. As discussed earlier their research also found that body surveillance and neuroticism have a large effect on both body dissatisfaction and on disordered eating, giving additional evidence for a link between these variables (Brannan & Petrie, 2008). 15 It would seem that body dissatisfaction is largely accountable for eating disorders, since our body reacts to how and what we eat. Body dissatisfaction coupled with the serious and dangerous side effects of eating disorders like Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa make this one of the most important areas of discussion relevant for men with body dissatisfaction. To further the discussion of the seriousness of these behaviors Crow, Eisenberg, Story, and Neumark-Sztainer (2008) found that body dissatisfaction, disordered eating, and obesity are linked to suicidal ideation and attempts. They continued this line of research with a longitudinal study examining these three factors, in which they found that among men with extreme body dissatisfaction and disordered eating 15.2% have suicidal ideations and 3.5% have attempted suicide, even after controlling for major depressive symptoms (Crow, Eisenberg, Story, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2008). Anabolic Steroid Use When men are struggling to achieve the unrealistic and often unnatural body image ideal of having large muscles while maintaining a lean weight they may often turn to an unrealistic and unnatural way to attain these goals. For many men, the opportunity to improve their body presents itself in the form of anabolic steroid use. Galli and Reel (2009) found that 40% of men find the need to be at peak physical fitness at any given time, meaning that whether or not they actually need to be in their peak physical fitness for practical concerns was irrelevant in comparison to their ideals. Another study by Smolak, Murnen, and Thompson (2005) revealed that anabolic steroid use was a primary 16 concern for boys and men with body dissatisfaction, most specifically for those trying to gain muscle weight. They found that 11.4% of men with body dissatisfaction have reported using anabolic steroids (Galli & Reel, 2009; Smolak, Murnen, & Thompson, 2005). There are notable health concerns for those abusing anabolic steroids and since a large number of men who are concerned with body image use them, it is important for researchers to continue to develop understanding of the use of these drugs. Depression and Suicide Lowered body esteem and body dissatisfaction indicates that men can be suffering from something larger as well, specifically we note that depression is common among men with body dissatisfaction. A study by Goldenberg, McCoy, and Greenberg (2000) showed that the physical body is the dominant source of self-esteem, mortality salience (reminder of one’s own mortality), interest in sex, and appearance monitoring. They found that when one sees the body as ideal or optimum one may have higher levels of self-esteem, accept their own mortality, have an increased interest in sex, and lower levels of appearance monitoring. When a man does not view his body as ideal they found that not only was the impact on these variables reversed, but that the men were also at a higher risk for depression (Goldenberg, McCoy, & Greenberg, 2000). Another study by Crow, Eisenberg, Story, and Neumark-Sztainer (2008) found a link between body dissatisfaction and suicidal ideation and attempts, though the effects do not appear to be direct. Men who reported that they were depressed due to disordered eating were also the most likely to have suicidal ideation and to have attempted suicide. Their study also 17 found a link between disordered eating and body dissatisfaction, showing that body dissatisfaction may have an indirect link to depression and suicidal behavior. Further, this study showed that the time of onset of body dissatisfaction and disordered eating is when men have the highest level of risk associated with suicidal behavior (Crow, Eisenberg, Story, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2008). This indicates that, in general, body dissatisfaction alone cannot predict suicidal behaviors; however, when body dissatisfaction is the primary reason for depression it increases the risk for suicidal behavior. Obviously this is a major problem and risk for those involved and could be seen as extreme indirect side effect to body dissatisfaction. 18 Theoretical Causes of Body Dissatisfaction Body Dissatisfaction for Gay Men The risks and side effects of body dissatisfaction can affect all men; however, gay men are consistently more dissatisfied with their bodies than heterosexual men. Studies by Tiggemann, Martins, and Kirkbride (2007) and Siever (1994) have previously shown us that gay men are the most likely group to be dissatisfied with their bodies as opposed to their heterosexual and lesbian counterparts (Tiggemann, Martins, & Kirkbride, 2007; Seiver, 1994). Other studies have shown that gay men are at increased risk of social stressors as well; however, they often find different theories for why they believe that gay men have this additional risk. Minority Stress Model There are two competing theories that describe why gay men have an increased risk of body dissatisfaction, the first of which is the minority stress model. This model has been used to predict and analyze behaviors of racial, religious, and sexually identified minorities. Poteat, Aragon, Espelage, and Koenig (2009) conducted a study that found that gay males were at higher risk for victimization than women or heterosexual racial minorities. This study also showed that there are positive correlations between victimization and depression, suicidal thought, and substance abuse (Poteat, Aragon, Espelage, & Koenig, 2009). This study indicated that gay men tend to have high rates of minority stress due to external sources that are accompanied by negative consequences. Korbov (2004) stated that men who are self-identified as both heterosexual and 19 unprejudiced use homophobia in language, social interaction, and ideology. He stated that these men unknowingly engage in homophobia while engaging in heteronormative masculine behaviors (Korobov, 2004). This study shows that homophobia and sexual minority victimization occurs as a commonplace trend as micro aggressions that have been engrained into our culture. Rostosky, Riggle, Gray, and Hatton (2007) believe that cultural competence is a construct that is important for all therapy, no matter what culture or subculture you are in. They suggest that cultural competence in working with gay men cannot be achieved without having some focus on minority stress. They hypothesize that the reason that gay men seek out more therapy, compared to their heterosexual counterparts, is due to this additional minority stress (Rostosky, Riggle, Gray, & Hatton, 2007). Hamilton and Mahalik (2009) use this model to show that stress due to being part of a minority group is a primary reason gay men engage in risky behaviors including drug abuse and risky sexual behaviors, may also be a reason they have higher levels of body dissatisfaction. The study was successful in demonstrating that gay men do in fact exhibit these additional risk factors and further hypothesized that it is primarily due to the stress of being part of a minority group (Hamilton, & Mahalik, 2009). Kimmel and Mahalik (2005) conducted a study to specifically examine minority stress’ role in the body image concerns of gay men. Not only were they able to find evidence for the role of minority stress in gay men’s body dissatisfaction, but they were also able to isolate three key components of minority stress that could predict body 20 dissatisfaction: internalized homophobia, expected stigma for being gay, and anti-gay physical attacks (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005). Parrot and Zeichner (2005). Not all researchers believe, however, that physical aggression is necessarily based on sexual discrimination or minority status, proposing that it may be for various other reasons. In their study Parrot and Zeichner (2005) found a positive correlation between sexual discrimination and physical aggression after heterosexual male participants viewed malemale relational media. This shows that a significant amount of physical aggression may be directed towards those of minority status based on sexual orientation (Parrot & Zeichner, 2005). This theory suggests that being a minority does in some way affect the way gay men perceive and feel about their body, however, it is not the only model that is used to describe the relationship between being gay and body dissatisfaction. Gender Role Strain Theory A competing theory attempting to explain the additional risk gay men face concerning body dissatisfaction is the gender role strain theory. Martins, Tiggemann, and Churchette (2008) hypothesize that individuals experience negative psychological consequences as a result of gender role discrepancy. Essentially, when an individual behaves outside of the traditional gender role they can be stigmatized by society. This strain combined with the gay subculture explains why gay men have similar body image risk factors as the general population of heterosexual women. Their study identified gay men as a group at high risk for body dissatisfaction and they hypothesized that this was due to gender role strain (Martins, Tiggemann, & Chuchette, 2008). Blashill and 21 Powlishta (2009) found that when both men and women read vignettes of actors and then evaluated their characteristics, gay men were rated more negatively than heterosexual men. Furthermore, they found that gay men with lower levels of traditional masculine traits were rated the most negatively (Blashill & Powlishta, 2009). This study shows that traditional masculine traits tend to be preferred over other gender roles. Blashill and Vander Wal (2009) found that higher sensitivity to gender role conflicts was positively correlated to both eating pathologies as well as body dissatisfaction (Blashill & Vander Wal, 2009). Burn and Ward (2005) provided further evidence gender role strain theory when they found that relationship satisfaction and body esteem can be predicted by how much participants conform to traditional masculine norms (Burn & Ward, 2005). Silverstein, Auerbach, and Levant (2002) suggest that gay and heterosexual men alike would benefit both socially and clinically by loosening the ever stricter masculine gender role. Their study shows that through the use of peer and parental education participants could spontaneously reconstruct viewpoints on masculinity, suggesting that there are effective interventions for gender role strain (Silverstein, Auerbach, & Levant, 2002). Gender role strain, however, is unable to predict the type of gender roles that gay men have, indicating that this theory cannot singularly predict why gay men have heightened amounts of body dissatisfaction, as well as, additional health risks related to body image. It is expected that gender role strain theory must also take into account other predictors of gender roles such as visibility in the gay community, in order to accurately predict body dissatisfaction in gay men. 22 Identity Development and Visibility Management Jamil, Harper, and Fernandez (2009), stated that identity development can be particularly challenging since there is no “right” way to create one’s sexual identity. They hypothesize that ethnic identity development involves a process of becoming aware of one’s heritage and culture, whereas sexual identity development involves finding one’s own personal sexual orientation label and connecting to the community of those with similar orientations (Jamil, Harper, Fernandez, 2009). This goes to show that there is a great amount of flexibility and complexity in sexual orientation identity development. Despite that flexibility, Cass (1979, 1984) proposed the theoretical foundation for homosexual identity formation. He suggests that there are six common stages one undergoes during homosexual identity development including: identity confusion, identity comparison, identity tolerance, identity acceptance, identity pride, and identity synthesis. Many of the stages focus on criticism based on either internal homophobia or prejudice of heterosexual identity, until identity synthesis occurs when homosexuality becomes only one aspect of an individual’s identity (Cass, 1979, 1984). This indicates that individual development is a somewhat uniform process that includes many negative feelings which culminate in a healthy resolution. The theoretical groundwork of Cass’s model involves the concerns that gay men have while developing their identity which are evidenced in empirical studies as well. Slater (1988) conducted a study in order to identify the concerns sexual minorities had regarding their sexual orientation. Most participants stated that coming out to ones’ self 23 and others was their greatest concern (Slater, 1988). Heatherington, and Lavner (2008) proposed that coming out is a psychological decision that can be a hurdle due to perceived fears and actual negative consequences. Some concerns are the perceptions of those that are immediately told and the perceptions of others as the information unfolds over time (Heatherington, & Lavner, 2008). Likewise, Griffith and Hebl (2002) have stated that coming out at work or school is an entirely different experience than it is with family or friends. Support structures in these settings are different and the reactions of others can vary greatly depending on the place of work and one’s coworkers (Griffith, & Hebl, 2002). Their study implies that coming out is a unique experience for each individual and that each coming out experience may be accompanied by unique results. The process of coming out is clearly different for each person and each coming out experience may be approached in unique ways or not at all. As stated previously, Lasser and Tharinger (2003) described visibility management as the dynamic, ongoing process in which members make careful, well planned behaviors regarding how they disclose their sexual orientation (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003). It is expected that this literature can be utilized to determine the extent to which one might feel minority stress, as well as, gender role strain. Visibility may be a direct cause of minority stress and gender role strain, and an indirect cause of body image and body dissatisfaction. 24 Proposed Research Study Statement of Problem Body dissatisfaction occurs in both women and men. However, research addressing men’s body image is still in an early stages (Schooler & Ward, 2006). Despite the limited literature, the available research suggests that men face distinct challenges in their body esteem (Frederick, Buchanan, Sadehgi-Azar, Peplau, Haselton, & Berezovskaya, 2007). Many men may find that their ideal body image is dangerous or even impossible to obtain realistically (Schooler & Ward, 2006). Body dissatisfaction typically occurs when a man’s ideal body is not the same as their real body (Lever, Frederick, & Paplau, 2006). There are several constructs that contribute to the current problem including the popular media (Farquhar & Waslykiw, 2007) and negative social comparisons (Goldenberg, McCoy, & Greenberg, 2000; Hozba, Walker, Yakushko, & Peugh, 2007). Body dissatisfaction is a problem that generally starts in adolescence (Crow, Eisenberg, Story, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2008) and can have lasting negative effects throughout the lifespan (Goldenberg, McCoy, & Greenberg, 2000; Brannan & Petrie, 2008; Trampe, Staple, & Siero, 2007). Some of the specific problems that can occur are illogical social comparisons (Trampe, Staple, & Siero, 2007), unhealthy obsessions (Papayani, 2005), disordered eating (Brannan & Petrie, 2008; Crow, Eisenberg, Story, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2008), abuse of anabolic steroids (Galli & Reel, 2009; Smolak, Murnen, & Thompson, 2005), depression (Goldenberg, McCoy, & Greenberg, 2000; Crow, Eisenberg, Story, & Neumark-Sztainer, 2008) and even suicide 25 is at times indirectly related to body dissatisfaction (Crow, Eisenberg, Story, & NeumarkSztainer, 2008). Gay men tend to have the same body ideals and concerns as there heterosexual counterparts (Seiver, 1994), yet research shows that gay men have higher rates of body dissatisfaction and are at higher risk for the negative consequences than heterosexual men (Tiggemann, Martins, & Kirkbride, 2007). To explain the higher rates and additional risks for gay men, researchers have tended to use two different theories. Some believe the higher rates and risks to be primarily due to the stress of being a part of a minority group (Hamilton, & Mahalik, 2009; Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005). Yet others believe the higher rates of body dissatisfaction is due to strain to conform to more traditional gender role behaviors, most specifically masculinity (Martins, Tiggemann, & Chuchette, 2008; Burn & Ward, 2005). Each theory has both strengths and limitations in predicting body dissatisfaction in gay men. This makes it difficult to pinpoint the root cause of the heightened rates of body dissatisfaction. A common link to bridge between the two theories may be the way that men carefully disclose behaviors that would identify their sexual orientation. This visibility management in the gay community may be this common link between the minority stress model and the gender role strain theory. It is hoped that this study will lead to a better understanding of why gay men have higher rates of body dissatisfaction as well as additional psychological risks concerning body image. It is hoped that through this research better interventions may be planned for gay individuals with body dissatisfaction. 26 Statement of Purpose The proposed study seeks to investigate the relationship between the minority stress model, gender role strain theory, and visibility management as it pertains to body dissatisfaction within the gay male community. This will be done to determine common causes for the higher rates of body dissatisfaction and additional risk of negative psychological effects among gay men. First the effect of the minority stress model on body dissatisfaction will be explored through three constructs; internalized homophobia, expected stigma for being gay, and anti-gay physical attacks. It is expected that this research study will find that minority stress model will be positively correlated with body dissatisfaction. Next, the effect of the gender role strain theory on body dissatisfaction will be explored through a rating scale that determines how much the participant endorses the traditional masculine gender role. It is expected that the gender role strain theory will be positively correlated with body dissatisfaction. Third, the research study will test the relationship of visibility management on both the minority stress model and the gender role strain theory to determine if visibility management may be a common cause to both of these constructs. It is hypothesized that higher levels of visibility within the gay community will be correlated positively to both the minority stress model and the gender role strain theory. The minority stress model and the gender role strain theory will be assessed through a series of questionnaires that are empirically based. Visibility management will be assessed using a pilot study of a questionnaire (Lasser, 2009). 27 Research Questions and Hypotheses Research Question 1 How are minority stress, gender role strain, and visibility management related to body dissatisfaction in gay men? Hypothesis 1 A Full Model (Figure 1) of the latent variables of minority stress, gender role strain, visibility management, and body dissatisfaction will have a good fit. Finding that the model has a good fit would indicate that the latent variables are related in some way. Then from a model of good fit, analyses can be made about the individual effects that each latent variable have. Rational The model indicates that the latent variable of minority stress has a path directly to body dissatisfaction. There is currently literature available to indicate that minority stress is related to body dissatisfaction. One study used the minority stress model to indicate the reasons that gay men undergo additional risks such as drug abuse and disordered eating that are thought to be caused by body dissatisfaction Hamilton, & Mahalik, 2009). Another study was able to determine three key factors that cause minority stress. These three factors are internalized homophobia, expected stigma for being gay, and anti gay physical attacks. The minority stress that is caused by these three factors is thought to produce additional amounts of body dissatisfaction (Kimmel & 28 Mahalik, 2005). This study is the reason behind the three measured variables of minority stress as well. The model indicates that the latent variable of gender role strain has a path directly to body dissatisfaction. There is literature available to help support the Full Model. One study shows that a gay male’s endorsement in traditional masculine roles is related to body dissatisfaction (Martins, Tiggemann, & Chuchette, 2008). Another study again supports this hypothesis in their findings that show that gender role strain can cause lower levels of body esteem (Burn & Ward, 2005). The current research in gender role strain theory typically points toward conformity and endorsement of traditional masculine roles, and the stereotypes of the masculinity that gay men have. However, endorsement does not always mean conformity to these norms. That is why it is important to determine the amount that men actually conform to these norms as well. Mahalik, Locke, Ludlow, Diemer, Scott, Gottfried, and Freitas (2003) conducted extensive analyses of men’s conformity to traditional masculine gender norms, and found that it is related to body dissatisfaction (Mahalik, Locke, Ludlow, Diemer, Scott, Gottfried, & Freitas, 2003). This is why I believed that there was a direct path from gender role strain to body dissatisfaction, as well as my choice in the Gender Role Conflict Scale as a measured variable. The model indicates that visibility management is a predictor of both minority stress as well as gender role strain. There is no literature on visibility management to suggest this relationship, however, qualitative interviews on visibility management 29 among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth indicates that it is a construct of adolescents lives (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003). Though the importance of visibility management’s effect on body dissatisfaction is still unknown, logic can be used to speculate about its influence. When gay men begin to disclose information about their sexual orientation, they may begin to start experiencing more minority stress as well as gender role strain. The more one is visible to the public, the likely more experiences one will have based on their sexual orientation. This is why I have created a path from visibility management to both minority stress and gender role strain. The choice in measured variables will be a pilot study, indicating that again there is little empirical data to support its use. However, initial trials support that it is a valid instrument that does indeed measure one’s visibility management (Lasser, 2009). This instrument is the only known visibility management scale and its initial support suggest that it is a statistically sound measure. This is why I have chosen to use it as a measured variable. Body dissatisfaction is the endogenous latent variable in my model. It is expected that minority stress, gender role strain, and visibility management will have direct and indirect causal effects on its scores. Literature supports that gay men are at higher risk for body dissatisfaction than heterosexual men (Tiggemann, Martins, & Kirkbride, 2007; Seiver, 1994). The abundance of literature that states body dissatisfaction is seen in higher rates for gay men have led to my choice in the endogenous latent variable of body dissatisfaction. A statistically sound measured variable of the body esteem scale (Franzoi & Herzog, 1987) will be used for a measured variable. Likewise body mass index will 30 also be used for a measured variable, as a study shows that body mass index is related to the amount of body dissatisfaction and the amount that one felt they needed lose weight (McCabe, Ricciardelli, 2003). Research Question 2 Does minority stress have a significantly greater effect on participant’s body dissatisfaction than gender role strain does as well as a large influence on body dissatisfaction? Hypothesis 2 The path from minority stress to body dissatisfaction will be significantly larger than the path from gender role strain to body dissatisfaction. This will be used to determine that minority stress does account for more influence on gay men’s body dissatisfaction than gender role strain. Sub-Hypothesis 1 It is hypothesized that the path from the latent variable minority stress will have a large influence on body dissatisfaction. Rationale Research suggests an existing association between minority stress and body dissatisfaction when gay men are used as the minority group in question (Hamilton, & Mahalik, 2009). This is seen specifically in three core constructs of the minority stress model; internalized homophobia, expected stigma for being gay, and anti-gay physical 31 attacks (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005). It is my expectation that this study will be a replication of the current literatures findings. This is why I believe that minority stress will have a large influence on body dissatisfaction for gay men. The reason that I hypothesized that minority stress will have more influence on body dissatisfaction than gender role strain is because gender role strain may be part of a larger minority strain model. The minority stress model has been used to predict and analyze behaviors in racial, religious, and sexually identified minorities (Rostosky, Riggle, Gray, and Hatton, 2007) and though it has not been empirically stated, nontraditional gender roles may be an aspect of being a minority that causes stress in gay men. This is why I expect the results to show that minority stress will have both a large influence on body dissatisfaction and a statistically significantly greater influence on body dissatisfaction compared to gender role strain. Research Question 3 Does gender role strain have a moderate influence on body dissatisfaction for gay men? Hypothesis 3 It is hypothesized that the path from the latent variable gender role strain will have a moderate influence on body dissatisfaction. This hypothesis will be used to determine the influence that gender role strain has on body dissatisfaction for gay men. Rationale 32 Research suggests that there is an existing association between gender role strain and body dissatisfaction in gay men who behave outside of the traditional gender role (Martins, Tiggemann, & Chuchette, 2008), This can be seen specifically when there is pressure both internally or externally to conform to traditional masculine norms. This pressure to conform is often caused by the stereotype that gay men are not masculine and have many effeminate characteristics (Burn & Ward, 2005). It is my expectation to replicate this literature through this research study. However, consistent with hypothesis 3, I believe that gender role strain will only have a moderate influence on body dissatisfaction, compared to a large influence on body dissatisfaction from minority stress. Research Question 4 Does visibility management have a large influence on minority stress and gender role strain? Hypothesis 4 It is hypothesized that the paths from the latent variable visibility management will have a large influence on both minority stress and gender role strain. This will be tested to determine the influence that visibility management has on minority stress. Sub-hypothesis 1 It is hypothesized that the path from visibility management will have a large influence on minority stress. This will be tested to determine the influence that visibility management has on gender role strain. 33 Rationale Research has shown that gay men have been able to make careful planned behaviors to how they disclose their sexual orientation (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003), these behaviors are expected to be a common cause as to why gay men feel minority stress and gender role strain. It is my expectation that these behaviors may affect the amount of minority stress and gender role strain that participants feel through the analysis of this study. The direct link between visibility management with minority stress and gender role strain has not been empirically studied, a qualitative study has shown that visibility management is a construct that effects adolescent gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003). It is expected that as one’s visibility in the gay community changes, the behaviors around them will differ, most specifically the behaviors surrounding minority status and masculinity stereotypes. 34 Method Participants Participants will be 140 gay men 18-22 years of age attending Universities in the United States. The men will be self identified as being exclusively or predominantly homosexual. Measures Kinsey Scale (KS). Participants’ sexual orientation will be assessed using a scale that does not force participants to make a categorical judgment between heterosexual and homosexual. Instead, it allows participants to indicate degrees of homosexuality and heterosexuality on a scale from 0 to 6, 0 being exclusively heterosexual and 6 being exclusively homosexual. Limitations of this scale include the lack of allowing for variation in sexual orientation over time; however, for this cross sectional study only one time point will be needed. Face validity will be used for this measure as it is primarily being used to determine whether or not a participant will be eligible in the study. The study will accept participants that score at a 4, 5, or 6, and will exclude those who identify closer to exclusively bisexual and heterosexual. (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948). Internalized Homophobia Scale (IHS). Assessment of the extent to which gay men are uneasy about their homosexuality and whether they seek to avoid homosexual feelings will be measured with 9 items that will be answered with a 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (often). This will be used to assess the strength of minority 35 stress in the participants. Composite scores will be created and can range from 9 to 36 points (Martin & Dean, 1987). The scale asks questions such as “How often have you wished you weren’t gay?” (Table 1). Previous studies have shown to that the IHP has adequate internal consistency for xyz samples (α = .89) (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005). The Stigma Scale (SS). Expectations of rejection and discrimination based on homosexuality will be assessed using an 11 item measure, with each item rated using a 6 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Examples of the statements include “The general public is understanding of people that are gay”, and “I am open to my family about my sexual orientation”. This scale will be used to assess the amount of minority stress that the participants feel. Scores on the composite can range from 11 to 66 (Martin & Dean, 1987). Studies have shown adequate internal consistency (α = .89) (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005) (Table 2). Higher scores indicate that the participant feels higher amounts of stigma due to being gay. Anti Gay Physical Attack- (AGPA). For a history of antigay physical attack, the study will use a single-item question to assess whether participants had been physically attacked because of their perceived sexual orientation: “If so, how many times have you been physically attacked because of your sexual orientation?” Meyer, (1995) as well as Kimmel and Mahalik (2005) used a similar single item question to determine gay men’s experiences of prejudice in their research on minority stress in gay men. No history of an antigay physical attack will be scored as 0 and a scores will increase by 1 for every additional anti gay attack. This item will be used to gauge history of antigay physical 36 attack as it relates to minority stress for gay men (Meyer, 1995; Kimmel, & Mahalik, 2005). Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory- (CMNI). The CMNI is a 94 item inventory that covers 11 different factors, with which men report their agreement on a 4 point Likert-type scale of 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree) on statements concerning thoughts on the continuum of conformity to traditional masculine norms. Participants answer questions pertaining to: winning, emotional control, risk-taking, violence, power over women, dominance, playboy behaviors, self-reliance, primacy of work, disdain for homosexuals, and pursuit of status. Analysis determined that there was good internal consistency (α= .94), and individual factors also had good internal consistency. Reliability ranged from .71 to .9. This measure will be used to determine the participant’s conformity to traditional masculine gender roles and their overall gender role strain (Mahalik, Locke, Ludlow, Deimer, Scott, Gottfried, Freitas, 2003). Gender Role Conflict Scale Adolescent Version (GRCS-AV). The GRCS-AV is a 29 item questionnaire (Table 3) with which men report their agreement on a Likert-type scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) on statements concerning thoughts and feelings about masculine gender roles. Participants rate statements such as “Being very personal to other men makes me feel anxious” and “Making money is part of my idea of being a successful man”. Factor analysis yielded four factors which were used to create subscales; restricted affection between men (RAM, α=.89), restricted emotionality (RE, α=.89), conflict between work, school, and family (CWSF, α=.88), and need for success 37 and achievement (NSA, α=.82). The subscale scores are summed and greater scores indicate greater gender role conflict. Test-retest reliability ranged from .72 to .85 and internal consistency reliability ranged from .75 to .85. The Gender Role Conflict Scale was adapted to better accommodate the strains that adolescents have concerning their gender role. This scale is best suited for men age 15-22. This measure will be used to determine the participant’s endorsement into traditional masculine gender roles and their overall gender role conflict (Blazina, Pisecco, & O’neil, 2005). Visibility Management Scale (VMS). The degree that participants disclose traits or characteristics that would be otherwise inconspicuous will be assessed using 47 items on a 6 point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). 40 items are designed to determine visibility management within the gay community, while the other 7 are designed to measure the ability to modify self-presentation. This scale will be complimented with a 10 point Likert scale that ranges from 1 (totally in the closet) to 10 (totally out of the closet) which is referred to as the Visibility Ruler (VR) (Table 4). This scale will be used to determine if there is a relationship between visibility management, minority stress, and gender role strain. Pilot trials found that internal consistency was moderate in the first version of the scale (α =.30-.79). However, this study will provide a pilot test of the revised addition of the VMS (Lasser & Tharinger, 2003; Lasser, Ryser, & Price, 2009; Lennox, & Wolfe, 1984). The Body Esteem Scale (BES). The BES is a 35 item scale that asks participants to rate how they feel about each part or aspect of their bodies in order to help determine 38 amount of body esteem or body dissatisfaction the participants feel (Table 5). They are rated using a 5 point Likert scale ranging from 1(Have Strong Negative Feelings) to 5 (Have Strong Positive Feelings). Participants rate body parts or aspects of the body such as “width of shoulders” and “physical condition”. Lower scores indicate greater rates of body dissatisfaction. The BES has a significant positive relation with other general measures of body esteem and self esteem (r= .14 - .63) (Franzoi & Herzog, 1987). Body Mass Index (BMI). Participants will be asked to give background information including height, and weight. From these two figures BMI will be calculated as a ratio of weight times 703 (lbs.) to height squared (in.) which will be measured on a continuous scale. This index is included to get an estimate on the actual condition of the body in comparison to the perceived and ideal self. McCabe and Ricciardelli (2003) found that BMI is related to both depressive symptoms as well as the participants’ feelings of needing to lose weight, even when this is controlled for by the fitness level of the participants (McCabe & Ricciardelli, 2003). Another study by Paxton, Eisenberg, and Neumark-Sztainer (2006) followed found that BMI consistently predicted body dissatisfaction for adolescents over the course of five years. For adolescent boys BMI was highly correlated with body dissatisfaction (r= .88) (Paxton, Eisenberg, & NeumarkSztainer, 2006). Demographic Information. Participants will answer questions on the consent form relating to their age, sex, race, ethnicity, and education level, and email address. Procedures 39 Approval by the Human Subjects Committee. Before beginning this study, all materials will be submitted for approval to the Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Texas at Austin. This study will be in compliance with the ethical standards set forth by the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Code of Ethics for research with human subjects. Participation in this proposed study will be voluntary and contingent upon approval by the participant assent. The participants of this study will be kept anonymous throughout the duration of the study and subsequent writings. Recruitment of participants. Participants will be recruited from the University of Texas at Austin’s gay, bisexual, and alliance fraternity (Delta Lambda Phi) both at the University of Texas at Austin and other chapters in the United States through snowball sampling. An outline of the study and all relevant materials will be presented to each group. Upon approval by the group, the researcher will contact the members to explain the study and answer any questions. All members who are between the ages of 18-22 will be invited to participate, with an incentive of a random drawing for prizes. A letter describing the nature of the study and a consent form will be given to the participants, explaining that participation is voluntary, and that consent may be revoked at any time, and that refusal to participate will not affect their relationship with their university or group in any way. Any participant returning the consent form will be eligible for participation. Group leaders will collect returned consent forms and give them to the researcher. 40 Data Collection. Data collection will occur via the internet at the leisure of the participant within a pre-appointed time frame. Participants who returned their consent form will be sent a link to the survey information and will be offered the opportunity to participate. Participants who do not complete the survey information will still be offered a raffle number for the prizes. 41 Data Analysis and Expected Results The primary purpose of this study is to examine minority stress, gender role strain, and visibility management and determine their effect on body dissatisfaction in gay men. Data including 6 separately scored indexes will be analyzed using structural equation modeling. A model was created to represent the contributions of the latent variable of minority stress, gender role strain, visibility management, and body dissatisfaction. This model, entitled Full Model, is shown in Figure 1. The model includes 3 measured variables to measure the latent variable minority stress, which are, the Internalized Homophobia Scale (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005), The Stigma Scale (Kimmel & Mahalik, 2005), and a single item called Anti Gay Physical Attack Meyer, 1995; Kimmel, & Mahalik, 2005). There is one measured variable to measure the latent variable gender role strain, which is, the Gender Role Conflict Scale Adolescent Version. There are 2 measured variables to measure the latent variable visibility management, which are, the Visibility Management Scale, and the Visibility Ruler. Last, the latent variable body dissatisfaction will have 2 measured variables, which are, the Body Esteem Scale and Body Mass Index. Preliminary Analysis Means, standard deviations, and correlations will be computed for each of the subtests. To ensure that all variables are reasonable and reflect their appropriate scales of measurement, the data will be checked by examining the descriptive statistics (i.e., 42 means, standard deviations, and ranges) as well as skew and kurtosis using SPSS. The latent variables are represented by ovals, the measured variables are represented by rectangles, and the causal effects will be represented by lines. The additional circles on my Full Model are a representation of error and unique variances. Both the Full and Equal Paths Models consist of 4 latent variables, 9 measured variables, and 3 error variances (Figure 1 & 2). The model and all future analyses were and will be created and performed using Amos version 17.0 (Arbuckle, 2005). Power Analysis A power analysis was run using the CSM Power program. The analysis indicates that a sample of 140 subjects will result in a power level of .8; a power level of at least .8 is desired. This value was reached by entering an RMSEA Null value of .05 (which indicates a desirable fit), a RMSEA Alternative value of .1 (which indicates a poor fit), an alpha significance level of .05, and 12 degrees of freedom. Hypotheses Research Question 1 How are minority stress, gender role strain, and visibility management related to body dissatisfaction in gay men? Hypothesis 1 A Full Model of the latent variables of minority stress, gender role strain, visibility management, and body dissatisfaction will explain the 9 measured variables and have a good fit. 43 The first hypothesis will be tested by conducting a confirmatory factor analysis to determine if the Full Model which includes minority stress, gender role strain, visibility management, and body dissatisfaction fits well. Fit statistics will be examined to determine if the proposed model fits the data. Values of the CFI, standardized RMR, and RMSEA will be examined to determine the fit of the model. Keith (2006) as well as Hu and Bentler (1999) stated that acceptable values indicating a good fit are: CFI greater than .95, standardized RMR less than .08, and RMSEA less than .05 (Keith, 2006; Hu, & Bentler, 1999). It is hypothesized that the Full Model will provide a good fit to the data. In order to continue with the analyses for Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4, the Full Model must have good fit indices. If the Full Model does not fit the data then further analyses cannot be done. F the Full Model does have a good fit, then Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4 will be analyzed using the Full Model. Research Question 2 Does minority stress have a significantly greater effect on participant’s body dissatisfaction than gender role strain does as well as a large influence on body dissatisfaction? Hypothesis 2 The path from minority stress to body dissatisfaction will be significantly larger than the path from gender role strain to body dissatisfaction. The second hypothesis will be tested by comparing the paths from minority stress and gender role strain to body 44 dissatisfaction. The latent variables’ paths to overall body dissatisfaction will be compared to determine if one is significantly higher than the other. In order to test this, an Equal Paths Model (Figure 2) must be made by setting the paths from minority stress and gender role strain to body dissatisfaction to equal. Once the Equal Paths Model is created, it will be run in AMOS to determine its fit. In order to compare the fit of the Equal Path Model to the fit of the Full Model, the following values will be compared: change in χ², CFI, standardized RMR, and RMSEA. The difference between the χ² of the Full Model and the χ² of the Equal Path Model will be tested to see if the change in χ² is significant. If the change in χ² is significant (p < .05) and the CFI, standardized RMR, and RMSEA values do not improve from the Full Model, then the Equal Path Model has a worse fit than the Full Model. If the fit of the Equal Path Model is worse, then the path from minority stress to body dissatisfaction is significantly different to the path from gender role strain to body dissatisfaction. It could be deduced that the larger path is significantly larger than the smaller path. It is hypothesized that the path between minority stress to body dissatisfaction will be significantly larger than the path from gender role strain and body dissatisfaction. Sub-Hypothesis 1 It is hypothesized that the path from the latent variable minority stress will have a large influence on body dissatisfaction. The sub-hypothesis of hypothesis 2 will be tested 45 by viewing the standardized regression coefficient that will be signified by β and this represents the path from one variable to another. Since the values of the variables are not in a meaningful metric the unstandardized regression coefficients will be converted to standardized regression coefficients. Keith (2006) stated that one of the basic rules of thumb regarding the magnitude of β are: below .05 are considered to be not meaningful, above .05 are considered small, above .1 are considered moderate, and above .25 are considered large (Keith, 2006). Therefore, to test my hypothesis the standardized regression coefficient of the path from minority stress to body dissatisfaction will need to be at or above .25. Research Question 3 Does gender role strain have a moderate influence on body dissatisfaction for gay men? Hypothesis 3 It is hypothesized that the path from the latent variable gender role strain will have a moderate influence on body dissatisfaction. Hypothesis 3 will be tested by viewing the standardized regression coefficient β. Since the values of the variables are not in a meaningful metric the unstandardized regression coefficients will be converted to standardized regression coefficients. Using the rules of thumb set for standardized regression coefficients a moderate influence would be a β between .1 and .249. To test my hypothesis the standardized regression coefficient of the path from gender role strain to body 46 dissatisfaction will need to be between .1 and .25. This hypothesis is consistent with hypothesis 2, in that I hypothesized that gender role strain would have a significantly lower effect on body dissatisfaction than that of minority stress. Research Question 4 Does visibility management have a large influence on minority stress and gender role strain? Hypothesis 4 It is hypothesized that the paths from the latent variable visibility management will have a large influence on both minority stress and gender role strain. Hypothesis 4 will be tested by viewing the standardized regression coefficient β. Sub-hypothesis 1 It is hypothesized that the path from visibility management will have a large influence on minority stress. Sub-hypothesis 1 of hypothesis 4 will be tested by viewing the standardized regression coefficient β. Since the values of the variables are not in a meaningful metric the unstandardized regression coefficients will be converted to standardized regression coefficients. Using the rules of thumb set for standardized regression coefficients a large influence would be a β above .25. To test my hypothesis the standardized regression coefficient of the path from visibility management to minority stress will need to be above .25. 47 Sub-hypothesis 2 It is hypothesized that the path from visibility management will have a large influence on gender role strain. Sub-hypothesis 2 of hypothesis 4 will be tested by viewing the standardized regression coefficient β. Since the values of the variables are not in a meaningful metric the unstandardized regression coefficients will be converted to standardized regression coefficients. Using the rules of thumb set for standardized regression coefficients a large influence would be a β above .25. To test my hypothesis the standardized regression coefficient of the path from visibility management to gender role strain will need to be above .25. 48 Figure 1 Full Model Internalized Homophobia Scale e2 1 The Stigma Scale 1 Minority Stress Anti Gay Physical Attack Body Dissatisfaction 1 e3 1 1 Visibility Management Visibility Management Scale Visibility Ruler Gender Role Strain 1 Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory 1 e4 49 Body Esteem Scale Gender Role Conflict Scale Body Mass Index Figure 2 Equal Paths Model Internalized Homophobia Scale e2 The Stigma Scale 1 1 Anti Gay Physical Attack Minority Stress a Body Dissatisfaction 1 e3 1 a 1 Visibility Management Visibility Management Scale Visibility Ruler Gender Role Strain 1 Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory 1 e4 50 Body Esteem Scale Gender Role Conflict Scale Body Mass Index Discussion The proposed study seeks to assess the association between minority stress, gender role strain, and visibility management as it relates to body dissatisfaction in gay men. It is expected that greater amounts of minority stress as well as greater amounts of gender role strain will directly affect body dissatisfaction in gay men. It is also expected that higher amounts of visibility in the gay community will directly affect minority stress and gender role strain. Visibility management is also expected to significantly affect body dissatisfaction for gay men indirectly. Previous research has indicated that minority stress is related to body dissatisfaction in gay men, the same can be said for the relationship between gender role strain and body dissatisfaction in gay men. It is my expectation that this study will be a replication of findings from previous literature in that both minority stress and gender role strain will be significant predictors of body dissatisfaction in gay men. Visibility management is a relatively new construct and information on the relationship between visibility in the gay community with minority stress and gender role strain is not available. However, it is my hypothesis that visibility in the gay community may have a meaningful impact on both minority stress and gender role strain. In regards to the relationship between visibility management and minority stress, it is my hypothesis that the higher one’s visibility is in the gay community the higher one’s level of minority stress will be. This is based on my hypothesis that the higher a person’s visibility is in the gay community the more likely that the self and others will 51 perceive them to be in a minority group. It is my hypothesis that these perceptions will then lead the self and others to behave differently towards the perceived minorities. Most specifically it is my hypothesis that a gay individual will be more likely to have internalized homophobia when the perception of being a minority is high, more likely to have higher expected stigmas for being gay when the perception of being a minority is high, and more likely that antigay physical attacks will increase when the perception of being a minority is high. In regards to the relationship between visibility management and gender role strain my hypothesis follows the same logic. It is my hypothesis that the higher one’s visibility is in the gay community the greater their gender role strain will also be. This is based on my expectation that the higher a person’s visibility is for a gay male the more likely the self and others will perceive them to be less masculine. It is my hypothesis that these perceptions will then lead the self and others to behave differently based on this perception. This is hypothesized to be specifically seen as either overcompensation or underestimation of traditional masculine gender role traits. Pending the rejection of the null hypotheses, the analyses of the findings would result in several conclusions. If hypothesis 1 is supported, it would show that minority stress will significantly account for variability in changes in body dissatisfaction. This would mean that minority stress would be considered a significant direct cause to body dissatisfaction for the gay men in this study. This result could be generalized to the gay male community, since this hypothesis will be a replication of other studies findings. 52 This would answer the research question, “Does minority stress account for a significant amount of variance in participant’s body dissatisfaction?” in the affirmative. If to hypothesis 2 is supported, it would show that endorsement of a traditional masculine gender role as it relates to gender role strain will significantly account for variability in changes in body dissatisfaction. This would mean that gender role strain would be considered a significant direct cause to body dissatisfaction for the gay men in this study. Again, these results could be generalized to the gay male community, since this hypothesis will be a replication of other studies findings. This would answer the research question, “Does endorsement to a traditional masculine gender role account for a significant amount of variance in participant’s body dissatisfaction?” in the affirmative. If hypothesis 3 is supported, it would show that visibility management is a common cause of and accounts for a significant amount of variance in minority stress and gender role strain. This would mean that visibility management was a significant predictor of both minority stress and gender role strain. However, these findings cannot be generalized to the larger gay male population until further replications of the study are made. This finding would answer the research question “Does visibility management account for a significant amount of variance in participant’s levels of minority stress and gender role strain?” in the affirmative. Since this research question does not have empirical data to strengthen the argument, replication will be necessary to determine reliability of this answer. 53 Limitations and Strengths While increases to minority stress may, as hypothesized, be associated with increases in body dissatisfaction for gay men, other plausible constructs may contribute to changes in body dissatisfaction for gay men. Minority stress may be a predictor of a larger construct such as depression or hypertension which may more directly affect body dissatisfaction for gay men. Individual differences in the participant’s ability to cope with stress may also affect the relationship between minority stress and body dissatisfaction. The minority stress model may predict the amount of stress that one receives based on their sexual orientation; however, it does not predict how well the individual can cope with these stressors. The differences in participants level of coping skills for minority stress is a factor that will need additional research to determine the role it plays on body dissatisfaction for gay men. While increases in gender role strain has been shown in research to relate to body dissatisfaction in gay men and may, as hypothesized, be replicated in the current research study, other possible constructs may contribute to changes in body dissatisfaction for gay men. Gender role strain may be a predictor of a larger construct such as depression or hypertension. Gender role strain may also be part of a larger minority stress model and may directly affect the individual’s amounts of minority stress. This construct may not be able to predict body dissatisfaction for all men based on individual differences in gender roles that gay men may have. As opposed to the minority stress model in which all gay men can be predicted to be in a minority group, the gender roles of men cannot be 54 predicted by sexual orientation. Therefore, it is important to note that individual differences in gender role strain may vary greatly depending on individual characteristics. Visibility management may be a common cause of minority stress and gender role strain, as hypothesized, though other plausible constructs may contribute to these minority stress and gender role strain. Visibility management has not been used to predict variables in the past, and more specifically it has not been associated with body image in previous research. It will be important to consider other alternatives to determine if visibility management is related to body image and body dissatisfaction. There is no empirical evidence to suggest that visibility management and gender role strain are caused by visibility management. It will be important to have replications of this study, to determine if visibility management is a reliable predictor of minority stress and body dissatisfaction. Likewise, there is no empirical data to indicate that visibility management indirectly affects body dissatisfaction. It will be important to have replications of this hypothesis to determine if visibility management is a reliable indirect effect on body dissatisfaction in gay men. It is expected that this research study will provide evidence to suggest that visibility management can be used as a predictor for variables outside of body image and body dissatisfaction. The method of assessment may also be of concern, specifically in the self reported nature of the measures. The participants will be measuring their perceived traits instead of their actual traits, which may result in additional variability in responses. The addition of an objective independent observer rating of visibility management and body 55 dissatisfaction may provide a broader, and perhaps more accurate, representation of both visibility management and body dissatisfaction. Additional limitations concern the actual make up of participants as they relate to sexual orientation. The makeup of the participants should be inclusive of all gay men that wish to participate. However, the measure used to determine eligibility does not take into account movement across sexual orientations over time, meaning that the current measure will only determine eligibility for men that are currently identifying with a gay sexual orientation. This may exclude members of the community that at one time identified with a gay sexual orientation, and at the current time do not. Likewise, the current study is excluding individuals that at the current time identify with having a sexual orientation that is primarily bisexual. Additional research into the bisexual community would be necessary to make conclusions for this population. However, adding bisexual men to a research study may help to broaden the scope of research into the relationship between sexual orientation, body image, and body dissatisfaction as a whole. Apart from the limitations of this study, there are several strengths in the research and the design. This will be the first time that visibility management has been used in the context of predicting constructs related to body image and body dissatisfaction. The successful prediction of minority stress and gender role strain, would allow for other studies to replicate and explore visibility management as a predictor variable. Likewise, this will be the pilot study for the Visibility Management Scale (Lasser, Ryser, Price, 56 2009) and will give psychometric support to this measurement. This may also help endorse its use for subsequent studies in this research area. Moreover, replication of previous researches findings on the relationship between body dissatisfaction with minority stress and gender role strain will help solidify the reliability in this line of research, since literature on the subject is limited. Implications As body dissatisfaction comes with many serious side effects such as disordered eating, depression, anabolic steroid use, and even has a relationship to suicide, it will be important to apply what is learned from this study to create the best possible interventions for the gay male population who is suffering from body dissatisfaction or related ill effects. The study hypothesizes that minority stress and gender role strain are direct causes of body dissatisfaction, and interventions related to stress management would be an ideal topic to start research into interventions for gay men with body dissatisfaction. The relationship between visibility management and minority stress and gender role strain should be analyzed for possible interventions, as well as preventative therapy for gay men regarding body dissatisfaction. Possible future research could help design preventative interventions for gay men regarding visibility management strategies, with the goal to help reduce or prepare for minority stress, gender role strain, and ultimately to help ward off body dissatisfaction. It is necessary that future research should be focused on replication of visibility management as a predictor of minority stress and gender role strain in gay men. The 57 current research study is the first to use visibility management as a predictor and replication will be necessary to determine its reliability as a predictor for minority stress and gender role strain. Furthermore, it is necessary that research in visibility management should be broadened to determine if it is a reliable predictor for other stressors outside of minority stress and gender role strain in order to determine the range of its effects. It is possible that research could be broadened to determine visibility management’s use as a predictor of for clinical psychopathologies as well as other constructs of stress. Additionally, future research should have a focus of broadening the scope of the research in body dissatisfaction to additional sexual minorities such as bisexual men. Final Statement Body esteem is a subject that all people must face in life, since health, media, and even social comparisons are factored into our everyday lives. For some people this leads to healthy body esteem, though for others this leads to body dissatisfaction. Moreover, some people, most specifically, gay men have a heightened risk for body dissatisfaction. Evidence would suggest that certain stressors that this population faces are at least part of the cause. This information is useful in creating interventions that target coping with stress, though it cannot stop this stress from occurring. It would be improbable and illogical to assume that one variable would be the sole cause of the stressors that gay men face regarding body image and body dissatisfaction, though this study attempts to find further the understanding of the causes. Finding root causes to the problem in question 58 could lead to interventions that help prevent the problem instead of coping with the problem. This study is one of the first steps in creating prevention for body dissatisfaction in gay men. 59 Appendices Table 1 Internalized Homophobia Scale Items (Men's Version) Participants are asked to use a scale of 1 (Never), 2 (Almost Never), 3 (Sometimes), 4 (Somewhat Often) and 5 (Often) on the following statements. I have tried to stop being attracted to men in general. _____ If someone offered me the chance to be completely heterosexual, I would accept the chance. _____ I wish I weren't gay/bisexual. _____ I feel that being gay/bisexual is a personal shortcoming for me. _____ I would like to get professional help in order to change my sexual orientation from gay/bisexual to straight. _____ I have tried to become more sexually attracted to women._____ I often feel it best to avoid personal or social involvement with other gay/bisexual men._____ I feel alienated from myself because of being gay/bisexual._____ I wish that I could develop more erotic feelings about women._____ 60 Table 2 The Stigma Scale Participants are asked to rate the following statements on a scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (Sometimes Disagree), 4 (Sometimes Agree), 5 (Agree), 6 (Strongly Agree). Items with the (r) are to be reverse scored. 1 The general public is understanding of people that are gay. _____ (r) 2 Other people have made me feel ashamed of myself because of my sexual orientation. _____ 3 I have been discriminated against in education because of my sexual orientation. _____ 4 People have avoided me because I am gay. _____ 5 Other people think less of me because I am gay. _____ 6 I am open to my family about my sexual orientation. _____ (r) 7 I am scared of how other people will react if they find out I was gay. _____ 8 I would have had better chances in life if I had not been gay. _____ 9 I do not mind people in my neighborhood knowing I am gay. _____ (r) 10 I would say I am gay if I was applying for a job. _____ (r) 11 People’s reactions to my sexual orientation make me keep myself to myself. _____ 61 Table 3 Gender Role Conflict Scale Adolescent Version Participants will report their agreement to the following statements using the following scale 1 (strongly disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (Somewhat Disagree), 4 (Somewhat Agree), 5 (Agree), to 6 (Strongly Agree). Restricted Affection between Men (RAM) Verbally expressing my love to another man is hard for me. _____ Affection with other men makes me tense. _____ Expressing my emotions to other men is risky. _____ Hugging other men is difficult for me. _____ I am sometimes hesitant to show my affection to men because of how others might judge me. _____ Being very personal with other men makes me feel anxious. _____ Men who are too friendly to me make me wonder about their sexual preference (men or women). _____ Restricted Emotionality (RE) I have difficulty telling others I care about them. _____ Strong emotions are difficult for me to understand. _____ Expressing feelings makes me feel open to attack by other people. _____ It is hard for me to talk about my feelings with others. _____ 62 It’s hard for me to express my emotional needs to others. _____ When I am personally involved with others, I do not express my strong feelings. _____ I often have trouble finding words that describe how I am feeling. _____ I do not like to show my emotions to other people. _____ Telling others about my strong feelings is difficult to me. _____ Conflict between Work, School, and Family (CWSF) I feel torn between my hectic work or school schedule and caring for my health. _____ My career, job, or school affects the quality of my leisure or family life. _____ I judge other people’s value by their level of achievement and success. _____ Finding time to relax is difficult for me. _____ My need to work or study keeps me from my family or leisure more than I would like. _____ My work or school often disrupts other parts of my life (home, health, leisure). _____ Overwork and stress caused by the need to achieve on the job or in school effects or hurts my life. _____ Need for Success and Achievement (NSA) Getting to the top of my class is important to me. _____ Making money is part of my idea of being a successful man. _____ Sometimes I define my personal value by my success at school. _____ I worry about failing and how it affects my doing well as a man. _____ 63 Doing well all the time is important to me. _____ I strive to be more successful than others. _____ 64 Table 4 Visibility Ruler Please indicate your level of visibility with respect to being gay/lesbian/bisexual. For example, someone who has not told anyone about his/her sexual orientation would respond with “1”; someone who has told everyone they know about their sexual orientation would respond with “10.” 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Totally in Totally out The closet of the closet Visibility Management Scale For the following items, please use the following response options: 1= Strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Slightly Disagree, 4= Slightly Agree, 5= Agree, 6= Strongly Agree R1. When talking with neighbors, I keep my sexual orientation to myself. 1 2 3 4 65 5 6 2. Disclosing my sexual orientation is liberating. 1 2 3 4 5 6 4 5 6 3. I draw attention to my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 R4. In some settings, I don’t want my sexual orientation to draw attention away from my other characteristics. 1 2 3 4 5 6 5. I think it’s important for my co-workers to know my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 5 6 6. When people assume that I’m straight, I correct them. 1 2 3 4 R7. I avoid conversations about sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 8. It feels good to tell others about my sexual orientation. 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 9. I want my casual acquaintances to know that I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 10. I think it’s appropriate to talk about my sexual orientation around people who have conservative values. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R11. When asked about my sexual orientation, I avoid telling people about myself. 1 2 3 4 5 6 12. I enjoy talking with gay/lesbian friends about my sexuality. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R13. I’m afraid that others will reject me if they know that I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R14. I worry that others will find out about my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 67 5 6 15. I do my best to let most people know that I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 5 6 16. I feel comfortable talking about my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 R17. I make an effort to “pass” or appear straight. 1 2 3 4 18. It is important to let others know about my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 19. I go out of my way to let people know about my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 20. Hearing others speak negatively about sexual orientation makes me feel like telling them I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual. 1 2 3 4 68 5 6 21. I let others know about my sexual orientation by showing them (e.g., wearing a gaythemed t-shirt). 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 R22. I work hard to keep my sexual orientation private. 1 2 3 4 R23. When I meet new people, I don’t want them to know about my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R24. I limit my public activities that would be perceived as gay/lesbian/bisexual (e.g., avoid gay pride events). 1 2 3 4 5 6 25. I feel comfortable sharing the fact that I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual in most settings. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R26. Some settings are more appropriate for disclosing my sexual orientation than others. 1 2 3 4 69 5 6 R27. I keep my sexual orientation to myself. 1 2 3 4 5 6 28. I am not concerned about my parents' reaction to my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 29. I want my extended family members to know my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 30. I try to let people know about my sexual orientation in many settings. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R31. I avoid talking about my sexual orientation with others. 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 32. Concealing my sexual orientation is a burden to me. 1 2 3 4 R33. Some settings seem safer for sharing my sexual orientation than others. 1 2 3 4 70 5 6 R34. When deciding whether I should tell someone about my sexual orientation, I consider whether the setting is appropriate. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R35. Sexual orientation should not be discussed in the workplace. 1 2 3 4 5 6 36. I have let most people know about my sexual orientation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 R37. I don’t let people know about my sexual orientation right away. 1 2 3 4 5 6 38. Gays/lesbians/bisexuals would be better off if more of us were out of the closet. 1 2 3 4 5 6 39. I participate in public activities that might lead others to assume that I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual. 1 2 3 4 71 5 6 R40. I’m uncomfortable with the idea of people knowing that I’m gay/lesbian/bisexual before I meet them. 1 2 3 4 5 6 For the following items, please use the following response options: 0= certainly, always true; 1=generally true; 2=somewhat true, but with exception; 3= somewhat false, but with exception; 4=generally false; 5=certainly, always false 1. In social situations, I have the ability to alter my behavior if I feel that something else is called for. 5 4 3 2 1 0 2. I have the ability to control the way I come across to people, depending on the impression I wish to give them. 5 4 3 2 1 0 3. When I feel the image I am portraying isn’t working, I can readily change it to something that does. 5 4 3 2 1 0 R4. I have trouble changing my behavior to suit different people and different situations. 72 5 4 3 2 1 0 5. I have found that I can adjust my behavior to meet the requirements of any situation I find myself in. 5 4 3 2 1 0 R6. Even when it might be to my advantage, I have difficulty putting up a good front. 5 4 3 2 1 0 7. Once I know what the situation calls for, it’s easy for me to regulate my actions accordingly. 5 4 3 2 1 0 73 Table 5 The Body-Esteem Scale Instructions: On this page are listed a number of body parts and functions. Please read each item and indicate how you feel about this part or function of your own body using the following scale: 1 = Have strong negative feelings 2 = Have moderate negative feelings 3 = Have no feeling one way or the other 4 = Have moderate positive feelings 5 = Have strong positive feelings 1. Body scent _____ 2. Appetite _____ 3. Nose _____ 4. Physical stamina _____ 5. Reflexes _____ 6. Lips _____ 7. Muscular strength _____ 8. Waist _____ 9. Energy level _____ 10. Thighs _____ 74 11. Ears _____ 12. Biceps _____ 13. Chin _____ 14. Body builds _____ 15. Physical coordination _____ 16. Buttocks _____ 17. Agility _____ 18. Width of shoulders _____ 19. Arms _____ 20. Chest or breasts _____ 21. Appearance of eyes _____ 22. cheeks/cheekbones _____ 23. Hips _____ 24. Legs _____ 25. Figure or physique _____ 26. Sex drive _____ 27. Feet _____ 28. Sex organs _____ 29. Appearance of stomach _____ 30. Health _____ 75 31. Sex activities _____ 32. Body hair _____ 33. Physical condition _____ 34. Face _____ 35. Weight _____ 76 References Arbuckle, J. (2009) Amos 17.0 User’s Guide .Chicago: Amos Development Corporation. Ata, R., Ludden, A., & Lally, M. (2007). The effects of gender and family, friend, and media influences on eating behaviors and body image during adolescence. J Youth Adolescence, 36, 1024-1037. Blashill, A., Powlishta, K. (2009). The impact of sexual orientation and gender role on evaluations of men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 10(2), 160-173. Blashill, A., Vander Wal, J. (2009). Mediation of gender role conflict and eating pathology in gay men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 10(3), 204-217. Blazina, C., Pisecco, S., & O’neil, J.(2005). An adaption of the gender role conflict scale for adolescents: Psychometric issues and correlates with psychological distress: Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 6(1), 35-49. Brannan, M., & Petrie, T. (2008). Moderators of the body dissatisfaction-eating disorder symptomology relationship: Replication and extension. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 55(2) 263-275. Burn, S., & Ward, Z. (2005). Men’s conformity to traditional masculinity and relationship statisfaction: Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 6(4) 254-263. Cass, V. C. (1979). Homosexual identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 219-235. Cass, V. C. (1984). Homosexual identity formation: Testing a theoretical model. The Journal of Sex Research, 20 (2), 143-167. 77 Crow, S., Eisenberg, M., Story, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2008). Are body dissatisfaction, eating disturbance, and body mass index predictors of suicidal behavior in adolescents? A longitudinal study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 76(5) 887-892. Farquhar, J., & Wasylkiw, L. (2007). Media images of men: Trends and consequences of body conceptualization. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8(3) 145-160. Franzoi, S., Herzog, M. (1986). The body esteem scale: A convergent and discriminate validity study. Journal of Personality Assessment, 50, 24-31. Frederick, D., Buchanan, G., Sagdehgi-Azar., L., Peplau, L., Haselton, M., Berezovskaya, A. (2007). Desiring the muscular ideal: Men’s body satisfaction in the United States, Ghana, and Ukraine. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 8(2) 103-117. Frederick, D., Fessler, D., Haselton, M. (2005). Do representations of male muscularity differ in men’s and women’s magazines? Body Image: An International Journal of Research, 2, 81-86. Galli, N., & Reel, J. (2009). Adonis or Hephaestus? Exploring body image in male athletes. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 10(2) 95-108. Gil, S. (2007). Body image, well-being, and sexual satisfaction: A comparison between heterosexual and gay men. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 22(2) 237-244. 78 Grabe, S., Ward, M., & Hyde, J. (2008). The role of the media in body image concerns among women: A meta-analysis of experimental and correlation studies. Psychological Bulletin, 134(3) 460-476. Griffith, K., Hebl, M. (2002). The disclosure dilemma for gay men and lesbians: “Coming out” at work. Journal of Applied Psychology. 87(6), 1191-1199. Goldenberg, J., McCoy, S., Greenberg, J. (2000). The body as a source of self-esteem: The effect of mortality salience on identification of one’s body, interest in sex, and appearance monitoring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1) 118-130. Hamilton, C., Mahalik, J. (2009). Minority stress, masculinity, and social norms predicting gay men’s health risk behaviors: Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(1) 132-141. Heatherington, L., Lavner, J. (2008). Coming to terms with coming out: Review and recommendations for family systems-focused research. Journal of Family Psychology. 22(3), 329-343. Hildebrandt, T., Langenbucher, J., Carr, S., Sanjuan, P., & Park, S. (2006). Predicting intentions or long-term anabolic-androgenic steroid use among men: A covariance structure model. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 20(3), 234-240. Hozba, C., Walker, K., Yakushko, O., & Peugh, J. (2007). What about men? Social comparison and the effects of media images on body and self-esteem. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8(3) 161-172. 79 Hu, L., Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 155. Jamil, O., Harper, G., Fernandex, M. I . (2009). Sexual and ethnic identity development among gay-bisexual-questioning (GBQ) male ethic minority adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 15(3), 203-214. Kaminski, P., Chapman, B., Haynes, S., & Own, L. (2005). Body image, eating behaviors, and attitudes toward exercise in gay and straight men. Eating Behaviors, 6, 179-187. Keith, T., Z. (2006). Multiple Regression and Beyond. Boston, Pearson Education Inc. Kimmel, S., Mahalik, J. (2005). Body image concerns of gay men: The roles of minority stress and conformity to masculine norms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(6) 1185-1190. Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W., Martin, C. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philidelphia: W. B. Saunders. Korobov, N. (2004). Inoculating against prejudice: A discursive approach to homophobia and sexism in adolescent male talk. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 5(2), 178-189. Kozak, M., Frankenhauser, H., & Roberts, T. (2009). Objects of desire: Objectification as a function of male sexual orientation, Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 10(3) 225-230. 80 Lasser, J., Ryser, G., Price, L. (2009). Development of a lesbian, gay, bisexual, visibility management scale. Unpublished Manuscript. Lasser, J., Tharinger, D. (2003). Visibility management in school and beyond: A qualitative study of gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 233-244. Leit, R., Pope, H., & Gray, J. (2001). Cultural expectation of muscularity in men: The evolution of playgirl centerfolds. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 90-93. Lennox, R. D., & Wolfe, R. N. (1984). Revision of the Self-Monitoring Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6) 1349-1364. Lever, J., Frederick, D., Peplau, L. (2006). Does size matter? Men’s and women’s views on penis size across the lifespan. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 7(3) 129143. Mahalik, J., Locke, D., Ludlow, L., Diemer, M., Scott, R., Gottfried, M., & Freitas, G. (2003). Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 4(1), 3-25. Martin, J., Dean, L. (1987). Summary of measures: Mental health effects of AIDS on atrisk homosexual men. Unpublished Manuscript, Division of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University at New York, School of Public Health. 81 Martins, Y., Tiggemann, M., Churchett, L. (2008). The shape of things to come: Gay men’s satisfaction with specific body parts. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 9(4) 248-256. McCabe, M., Ricciardelli, L. (2003). Body image strategies to lose weight and increase muscle among boys and girls. Health Psychology, 22(1) 39-46. McDonald, K., & Thompson, J. (1990). Eating disturbance, body image dissatisfaction, and reasons for exercising: Gender differences and correlational findings. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 11(3) 289-292. Meyer, I. (1995). Minority stress and mental health in gay men: Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 38-56. Olivardia, R., Pope, H., Borowiecki, J., &Cohane, G. (2004). Biceps and body image: The relationship between muscularity and self-esteem, depression, and eating disorder symptoms. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 5(2) 112-120. Olivardia, R., Pope, H., & Hudson, J. (2000). Muscle dsymorphia in male weightlifters: A case-control study. American Psychiatric Assn. 157(8) 1291-1296. Ousley, L., Cordero, E., & White, S. (2008). Eating disorders and body image of undergraduate men. Journal of American College Health, 56(6) 617-621. Papayani. N. (2005). Body image disturbance: A hermeneutic perspective. Dissertation Abstracts International. 66(1-B) 569. 82 Parrot, D., & Zeichner, A. (2005). Effects of sexual prejudice and anger on physical aggression toward gay and heterosexual men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 6(1), 3-17. Paxton, S., Eisenberg, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2006). Prospective predictors of body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls and boys: A five year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology. 42(5), 888-889. Pope, H., Gruber, A., Mangweth, B., Bureau, B., deCol, ., & Jouvent, R. (2000). Body image perception among men in three countries. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 1297-1301. Pope, H. G., Olivardia, R., Borowiecki, J. J., &Cohane, G. H. (2001). The growing commercial value of the male body: A longitudinal survey of advertising in women’s magazines. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 70, 189-192. Poteat, V., Aragon, S., Espelage, D., & Koenig, B. (2009). Psychosocial concerns of sexual minority youth: Complexity and caution in group differences. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology. 77(1), 196-201. Rostosky, S., Riggle, E., Gray, B., & Hatton, R., (2007). Minority stress experiences in committed same-sex couple relationships. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 38(4), 392-400. Schooler, D., & Ward, L. (2006). Average Joes: Men’s relationships with media, real bodies, and sexuality. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 7(1) 27-41. 83 Seiver, M. (1994). Sexual orientation and gender as factors in socioculturally acquired vulnerability to body dissatisfaction and eating disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 252-260. Silverstein, L., Auerbach, C., Levant, R. (2002). Contemporary fathers reconstructing masculinity: Clinical implications of gender role strain. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 33(4), 361-69. Slater, B. (1988). Essential issues in working with lesbian and gay youths. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 19(2), 226-235. Smolok, L., Murnen, S., Thompson, J. (2005). Sociocultural influences and muscle building in adolescent boys. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. 6(4) 227-239. Stunkard, A., Sorenson, T., Schulsinger, F. (1980). Use of the Danish adoption register for the study of obesity and thinness. The Genetics of Neurological and psychiatric disorders, 155-120. Tiggemann, M., Martins, Y., & Kirkbride, A. (2007). Oh to be lean and muscular: Body image ideals in gay and heterosexual men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8(1) 15-24. Thompson, J., & Altabe, M. (1991). Psychometric qualities of The Figure Rating Scale. International Journal of Eating Disorder, 10, 615-619. Trampe, D., Staple, D., Siero, F. (2007). On models and vases: Body dissatisfaction and proneness to social comparison effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1) 106-118. 84 Willoughby, B., Lai, B., Doty, N., & Mackey, E. (2008). Peer crowd affiliations of adult gay men: Linkages with health risk behaviors. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 9(4) 235-247. 85