Download Minority Stress, Gender Role Strain, and Visibility Management

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