Essay Grade

Journal of Bisexuality
ISSN: 1529-9716 (Print) 1529-9724 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjbi20
Personal, Relational and Community Aspects of
Bisexual Identity in Emerging, Early and Middle
Adult Cohorts
Melanie E. Brewster & Bonnie Moradi
To cite this article: Melanie E. Brewster & Bonnie Moradi (2010) Personal, Relational and
Community Aspects of Bisexual Identity in Emerging, Early and Middle Adult Cohorts, Journal of
Bisexuality, 10:4, 404-428
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15299716.2010.521056
Published online: 08 Dec 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 3728
View related articles
Citing articles: 10 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wjbi20
Download by: [Walden University]
Date: 23 December 2017, At: 08:29
Journal of Bisexuality, 10:404–428, 2010
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1529-9716 print / 1529-9724 online
DOI: 10.1080/15299716.2010.521056
Personal, Relational and Community Aspects
of Bisexual Identity in Emerging, Early
and Middle Adult Cohorts
MELANIE E. BREWSTER and BONNIE MORADI
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
This study offered exploratory comparisons of personal, relational
and community aspects of bisexual identity for women and men
in emerging adulthood relative to those in early and middle adult
cohorts. In this sample of 576 bisexual individuals, the pattern of
findings for some aspects of bisexual identity (e.g., relationship commitment, bisexual community involvement) was consistent with the
developmental perspective that characterizes emerging adulthood
as a period of identity exploration and low commitment relative
to increasing identity commitment across early and middle adulthood. For other aspects of bisexual identity (e.g., self-described sexual orientation, outness and sexual behavior), gender appeared
to play a role, either on its own or in conjunction with life stage
cohort.
KEYWORDS bisexuality, bisexual youth, emerging adults, sexual
orientation, sexual identity, romantic relationships, sexuality, life
stage development, early adulthood, middle adulthood
Despite growing attention to identity issues in lesbian and gay populations,
there remains a dearth of literature focused on bisexual identity (e.g., Diamond, 2008; Israel & Mohr, 2004; Phillips, Ingram, Smith, & Mindes, 2003).
Specifically, the literature on lesbian and gay identity has delineated personal
(e.g., self-identified orientation, outness), relational (e.g., romantic attractions
and relationships) and community (e.g., connection with sexual minority
This research was supported in part by the APA Society for the Psychological Study of
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues Bisexual Foundation Scholarship Award. This manuscript is
based on data from the first author’s master’s thesis.
Address correspondence to Bonnie Moradi, Department of Psychology, University of
Florida, P.O. Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, USA. E-mail: moradib@ufl.edu
404
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
M. E. Brewster and B. Moradi
405
communities) aspects of sexual identity (e.g., Cass, 1979; Fassinger & Miller,
1996; McCarn & Fassinger, 1996; Morales, 1989; Troiden, 1989). For example,
romantic attractions and relationships are thought to be important in sexual
identity formation and, in turn, in coming out as a sexual minority person
(McCarn & Fassinger, 1996). Similarly, awareness of and connection with
sexual minority community groups have been conceptualized as important
to identity development, as these communities can facilitate self-definition
and self-acceptance and provide support and validation to sexual minority
community members (Cass, 1979; Morales, 1989; Troiden, 1989).
Although personal, relational and community aspects of sexual identity
have been discussed extensively for lesbian and gay people, attention is
needed to these aspects of bisexual identity and how they may vary with
developmental stages throughout life for bisexual individuals. Particularly,
developmental conceptualizations suggest that emerging adulthood is a period of greater identity and relational exploration and lower commitment
relative to early and middle adulthood (e.g., Arnett, 2000; Levinson, 1986;
Nelson & Barry, 2005). The current study offers exploratory comparisons of
bisexual individuals from emerging, early and middle adulthood cohorts on
personal, relational and community aspects of bisexual identity.
To facilitate the present discussion of identity, we adopt the following
conceptualization and terminology of sexual identity and its components
(Moradi, Mohr, Worthington, & Fassinger, 2009; Worthington, Savoy, Dillon, & Vernaglia, 2002): Sexual identity is defined as the self-acknowledged
collection of sexual behaviors, values, needs, preferences and so on that
make up an individual’s sexuality. Sexual identity includes sexual orientation, which reflects sexual, affectional and relational orientations toward
others as related to their gender or sex characteristics (e.g., same-, other-,
pan-sexual orientation). Sexual orientation identity, in turn, reflects the internal (e.g., self-identified orientation) and external (e.g., outness to others)
claiming of sexual orientation at the individual or personal level and sense
of group connection and membership at the collective or community level.
Thus, in the present examination of bisexual identity across life stage cohorts, the relational aspects of sexual orientation are reflected in assessment
of romantic attractions, behaviors and relationships; the personal and community aspects of sexual orientation identity are reflected in assessment of
self-identified sexual orientation, outness and community connection. These
aspects of bisexual identity are compared across emerging, early and middle
adult cohorts.
Emerging Adulthood and Distinctions from Early
and Middle Adulthood
The ages of 18 to 25 are posited to represent a distinctly formative period of development termed emerging adulthood that is characterized by
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
406
Journal of Bisexuality
demographic flux (e.g., residential status, school attendance), role ambivalence (e.g., perceptions of self-sufficiency) and identity exploration (Arnett,
2000). Emerging adults are youth who have left their adolescent roles but
are yet to commit to adult roles or to consider themselves adults (Arnett,
2000; Nelson & Barry, 2005). Emerging adulthood is marked by uncertainty
and the sense that many different routes in life are available; individuals in
this life stage may be inclined to experiment with social roles and identities
in the course of establishing a life structure and considering various possible
identity and role commitments (Erikson, 1968; Levinson et al., 1979).
Emerging adulthood is particularly important for identity formation in
that this is “the period of life that offers the most opportunity for identity exploration in the areas of love, work, and worldviews” (Arnett, 2000, p. 473).
Of particular relevance to sexual identity is that emerging adulthood is a
time of experimentation with dating and relationships, entering intimate and
nonmarital relations, and beginning to treat romantic relationships as serious quests for emotional and physical intimacy rather than as recreational
activities (Arnett, 2000; Nelson & Barry, 2005). In emerging adulthood, individuals begin to consider their own identities in the context of romantic
relationships, asking: “Given the kind of person I am, what kind of person
do I wish to have as a partner through life?” (Arnett, 2000, p. 473). Because
romantic attraction and relationships are important aspects of sexual identity, the task of self-definition through relationship definition may make the
emerging adulthood stage a particularly salient time of intense exploration,
interpersonal growth, and identity formation for bisexual people who experience attraction to more than one gender. Within this context of personal
exploration and experimentation, emerging adults are also likely to have
more self- than other-oriented goals (Arnett, 2000; Nelson & Barry, 2005)
that suggests potentially low commitment in community aspects of bisexual
identity.
The identity exploration and experimentation that characterize emerging
adulthood distinguish this stage from the increasing commitment and stability that characterize the subsequent developmental stages of early adulthood
and middle adulthood (Berk, 2007; Levinson et al., 1979). Early adulthood
is typically defined as an age range spanning from the mid-twenties to early
forties, whereas middle adulthood encompasses ages from the early forties to mid-sixties. Early adulthood is marked by the peak years of the life
cycle, in which individuals establish a niche in society and often form stable relationships and occupations (Levinson, 1986). Beyond developing a
more concrete sense of self, individuals in early adulthood may also incur
stress related to relationship commitments, parenthood and financial obligations. Levinson (1986) described this period as a time when individuals
make important choices regarding family, work and lifestyles without “the
maturity or life experience to choose wisely” (p. 5). In contrast to the peak
of early adulthood, middle adulthood is marked by a decrease in biological
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
M. E. Brewster and B. Moradi
407
capacities and increasing sense of personal responsibility for future generations; individuals in this stage are thought to feel responsible for their own
work and the work of others as they prepare to transition away from past
social roles (i.e., parenthood, employee; Levinson, 1986). Thus, emerging
adulthood is marked by tumultuous self-discovery, identity exploration and
low identity commitment, whereas early and middle adulthood are conceptualized as times of greater stability, personal identity and role commitment
and collective responsibility and commitment.
Although a developmental perspective conceptualizes emerging adulthood as a period of low identity commitment relative to early and
middle adulthood, attention to shifts in larger social contexts suggests potentially countervailing forces. For example, although sexual minority orientations and identities, including bisexuality, have become more visible
over time (e.g., Grossman, D’Augelli, & Hershberger, 2000; Keppel, 2006;
Savin-Williams, 2008), older bisexual cohorts may have experienced a virtual invisibility of bisexuality in culture, media and social contexts during
most of their life. Keppel (2006) suggested that as a consequence of such
experiences of invisibility, older bisexual cohorts may lack supportive social
networks (e.g., sexual minority or bisexual communities), perceive greater
risks associated with ‘outness’ (e.g., loss of employment, family issues and
health care rights for partners) and struggle with coming out. From this perspective, it follows that bisexual persons in early and middle adulthood may
be less out and less likely to be involved with bisexual or sexual minority
communities than are emerging adults. These countervailing developmental
and social context expectations—that emerging adults would have lower or
higher commitment to personal, relational and community aspects of bisexual identity relative to older cohorts—remain largely speculative and warrant
empirical exploration.
Gender and Bisexuality
Attention to gender is also important in exploring bisexual identity across
life stage cohorts because some differences in the experiences of women
and men may have implications for personal, relational and community aspects of sexual identity. For example, based on a review of the literature,
Brown (2002) surmised that women may be more comfortable with identifying as bisexual and more reflective and comfortable with ambiguity in their
coming-out process whereas men may be less comfortable with identifying
as bisexual and come out more abruptly and with less reflection. Such differences in self-identification and coming out may be shaped by a view of
same-sex attractions as a threat to masculinity and related social status, by
societal perceptions that men are either gay or straight (in contrast to views
that women’s sexuality is more flexible) and by societal stigmatization of
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
408
Journal of Bisexuality
bisexual men as AIDS vectors (Brown, 2002; Burleson, 2005; Dodge, Reece,
& Gebhard, 2008). Indeed, there is some evidence to suggest more overall
negative attitudes toward bisexual men than women (Eliason, 2001).
Some gender differences in relational identity variables—including contexts for meeting same-sex partners, exploration of same-sex attractions,
and same-sex sexual behaviors—also have been observed. In this regard,
Baumeister (2000) suggested that women have greater “erotic plasticity”
(p. 348) such that women’s sexual responses and behaviors are more malleable and shaped by cultural, social and situational factors than are men’s
responses; such erotic plasticity may have implications for relational aspects
of identity for bisexual women and men. For instance, Burleson (2005) found
that many bisexual women, but not men, in other-sex relationships were
allowed or encouraged by romantic partners to explore their same-sex attractions. Furthermore, many bisexual men met male partners through cruising, sex parties or the Internet, whereas most women met female partners
through friends, work or polyamory community events. Bisexual men also
had significantly more same-gender sex than did bisexual women. In addition, findings with sexual minority youth suggest gender differences in the
centrality of sexual behavior to same-sex attractions and self-labeling. For
instance, in their sample of emerging adults, Savin-Williams and Diamond
(2000) found that women were more likely to describe their first same-sex
attractions and self-labeling as emotionally oriented whereas men were more
likely to provide sexually oriented descriptions. In this sample, men were
also more likely to engage in same-sex sexual behavior prior to self-labeling
as sexual minority whereas women were more likely to self-label first and
then engage in same-sex sexual behavior.
With regard to community identity and connection, bisexual men and
women may experience strain in finding support within the lesbian and
gay community, but for different reasons. For example, bisexual men in
Burleson’s (2005) sample reported that their sexual orientation was not taken
seriously by some gay men who perceived bisexual men as gay but in denial (as reflected in the saying “bi now, gay later”). Women may experience
disconnection from some lesbian communities because of the view that relationships with men reinforce patriarchy and subjugation of women (Brown,
2002; Burleson, 2005; Israel & Mohr, 2004). Taken together, this literature
suggests that gendered contexts might shape differences in personal, relational, and community aspects of bisexual identity.
CURRENT STUDY
Based on the literature reviewed here, the current study provides exploratory
comparisons of bisexual individuals in emerging, early and middle adult
cohorts on personal identity variables (i.e., self-identified orientation and
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
M. E. Brewster and B. Moradi
409
level of outness), relational identity variables (i.e., relationship commitment
status, polyamory, same- and other-sex attractions and sexual behaviors)
and community identity variables (i.e., involvement in sexual minority and
bisexual communities). Moreover, given prior literature suggesting potential
variations in women and men’s experiences of aspects of bisexual identity
(e.g., Brown, 2002; Burleson, 2005), gender and its interaction with life stage
cohort will also be explored. Due to the limited literature on personal, relational and community aspects of bisexual identity across life stages, no
directional hypotheses are made. Overall, developmental conceptualizations
of the life stages suggest that emerging adulthood would be a period of
low commitment to personal, relational and community aspects of bisexual
identity, with a pattern of increasing commitment across early and middle
adulthood; the social context perspective suggests the countervailing pattern
that emerging adults might be more committed to these aspects of bisexual
identity given greater visibility of bisexuality and bisexual communities in
their social contexts.
METHOD
Procedures
Participants were recruited via online resources such as electronic listserves,
discussion boards and virtual communities for bisexual or sexual minority
individuals. The study was advertised as an examination of the life experiences of bisexual individuals. Participants were directed to an online survey
that began with an informed consent page. To participate in the study, respondents had to first affirm that they (1) identified as bisexual, (2) were age
18 years older, and (3) resided in the United States. If respondents affirmed
that they met these inclusion criteria and agreed to participate after reading
the informed consent, they were prompted to complete the survey.
The Internet has been a useful tool for collecting data from lesbian,
gay and bisexual (LGB) samples (Moradi et al., 2009). Specifically, sexual
minority listserves and online message boards may be good recruitment
venues because LGB people tend to view the Internet as a safe place to
connect with other sexual minority individuals (Riggle, Rostosky, & Reedy,
2005). Furthermore, even if such persons are not ‘out’ broadly, they may
feel comfortable being ‘out’ online because the Internet provides a shield of
anonymity; thus, the Internet is a viable resource for recruiting these underrepresented individuals (Mustanski, 2001). Online surveys also are shown
to yield similar responses as traditional pen-and-paper methods while being more cost-efficient (Gosling, Vazire, Srivastava, & John, 2004; Hiskey &
Troop, 2002). In recent years, numerous studies have utilized online methods
as their primary means to recruit sexual minority participants (e.g., CarballoDieguez, Miner, Dolezal, Rosser, & Jacoby, 2006; Fernández et al., 2005;
Wang & Ross, 2002). In the current study, to reduce the risk of nonbisexual
410
Journal of Bisexuality
people participating, the survey link was distributed only to groups or networks that included bisexual individuals or bisexuality issues. Additionally,
four validity questions asking participants to mark a particular response (e.g.,
Please mark “strongly agree”) were included within the survey to ensure that
participants were responding attentively.
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
Participants
Data from 576 participants were analyzed in the current study. These data
were drawn from a larger data set (N = 699) on the life experiences of
bisexual individuals (Brewster & Moradi, 2010); participants were selected
for inclusion if they had data for most of the variables of interest. Participants
ranged in age from 18 to 65 (M = 32.13, SD = 11.24, Mdn = 29.00) and
were divided into three groups based on prior definitions of life stage ages
(Arnett, 2000; Levinson et al., 1979; Nelson & Barry, 2005): emerging adults
ranging from 18 to 25 (n = 207; M = 21.39, SD = 2.47, Mdn = 21.00),
young adults ranging from 26 to 40 (n = 240, M = 32.28, SD = 4.45,
Mdn = 32.00), and middle adults ranging from age 41 to 65 years (n =
129, M = 49.07, SD = 6.70, Mdn = 47.00). In terms of gender, about 59%
of participants identified as female, 40% as male and 1% as transgender
(two male-to-female and seven female-to-male participants). Approximately
78% of the sample identified as White, 10% as multiracial, 5% as Latino/a
American, 4% as Black/African American, 2% as Asian American, 1% as other
race/ethnicities and 1% as Native American. In terms of level of education,
roughly 35% of participants reported having a college degree, 33% having
some college education, 22% having a professional degree, 9% having a
high school degree, 1% having some high school education and less than
1% having no high school education. With regard to social class, roughly
51% of participants described themselves as middle class, 25% as working
class, 19% as upper middle class, 4% as lower class and 1% as upper class.
Measures
Personal identity variables. Participants were asked to rate their sexual
orientation with the following item, “Please select your sexual orientation
using the BEST descriptor.” Possible orientations were (1) exclusively lesbian/gay, (2) mostly lesbian/gay, (3) bisexual, (4) mostly heterosexual, and
(5) exclusively heterosexual. Respondents who described their orientation
as mostly lesbian or gay (10% of the sample) or mostly heterosexual (14%
of the sample) were included in the current study because scholars have
noted that bisexuality is a spectrum and that bisexual individuals may not
experience equal attraction to both genders (e.g., Rust, 2000). None of the
participants identified as exclusively lesbian/gay or heterosexual.
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
M. E. Brewster and B. Moradi
411
The 10-item Outness Inventory (OI; Mohr & Fassinger, 2000) was used
to assess the degree to which respondents’ sexual orientation is known or
talked about within different social spheres of their life. The measure asks
participants to rate on a 7-point continuum (1 = person definitely does not
know about your sexual orientation status to 7 = person definitely knows
about your sexual orientation status, and it is openly talked about) how open
they are about their sexual orientation to members of their social network
(e.g., friends, coworkers, family). For the current study, we added the item
“new lesbian/gay friends” to parallel an item examining outness with “new
straight friends” resulting in a total of 11 OI items. Item ratings are averaged to
yield an overall score, with higher scores indicating greater levels of outness.
Balsam and Mohr (2007) found a Cronbach’s alpha of .89 for OI items with
their sample of bisexual individuals. In terms of validity, prior studies have
found that OI scores correlate positively with involvement in lesbian and
gay communities for LGB individuals (Balsam & Szymanski, 2005; Mohr &
Fassinger, 2000). Moreover, validity evidence specific to bisexual individuals
was reported by Balsam and Mohr (2007) who found that outness was
correlated negatively with a measure of desire to keep sexual orientation
private. Cronbach’s alpha for OI items with the current sample was .87.
Relational identity variables. Participants were asked to rate their physical and emotional attraction to members of the same and other sex (i.e.,
“How much are you physically attracted to members of your own [the other]
sex? How much are you emotionally attracted to members of your own [the
other] sex?”). Attraction to the target groups was rated on a 5-point rating
scale: 1 (low), 3 = (moderate), and 5 (high).
Participants were also asked about the gender specificity of their sexual
experiences (i.e., “Have you had sex with persons of your own gender, the
other gender, or both genders?”). Response options included 0 (never had
sex), 1 (my own gender only), 2 (my own gender mostly), 3 (both genders
equally), 4 (other gender mostly), and 5 (other gender only).
Last, participants were asked about their romantic relationships. Specifically, they described their current relationship status as (1) single, (2) casually
dating, (3) long-term dating, or (4) married/partnered. They were also asked
if they identified as polyamorous (yes or no).
Community identity variables. Participants were asked to describe
how connected or involved they were with (1) LGBTQ and (2) bisexual
communities using a 5-point continuum from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely).
RESULTS
Descriptive information and correlations among the variables of interest are
reported in Tables 1, 2 and 3, respectively. To examine the relations of
life stage cohort, gender and their interaction with the variables of interest,
412
Journal of Bisexuality
TABLE 1 Descriptive Data for Variables of Interest for All Participants
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
Variables
Personal identity variables
Self-identified sexual orientation
1 = Exclusively lesbian/gay
2 = Mostly lesbian/gay
3 = Bisexual
4 = Mostly heterosexual
5 = Heterosexual
Outness (1 = not out, 7 = very out)
Relational identity variables
Same-sex physical attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Same-sex emotional attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Other-sex physical attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Other-sex emotional attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Sexual behavior
Never had sex
(1 = own gender only, 5 = other gender only)
Polyamorous
1 = Yes
2 = No
Relationship status
1 = Single
2 = Casually dating
3 = Long-term dating
4 = Married/partnered
Community identity variables
Connected/involved with LGBT community
(1 = not at all, 5 = extremely)
Connected/involved with bisexual community
(1 = not at all, 5 = extremely)
N
(%)
—
57
437
79
—
—
10
76
14
—
44
M
SD
3.04
.49
3.19
1.39
4.11
3.86
3.92
3.89
.95
1.14
1.02
1.06
3.41
1.00
2.54
1.14
1.88
1.00
8
222
354
39
61
162
62
123
229
28
11
21
40
LGBT = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender.
log-linear analyses and follow-up chi-square tests were conducted when the
categories of the dependent variable were of interest (e.g., sexual orientation
category). Log-linear analysis is an extension of chi-square test that is used to
examine relationships among more than two categorical variables; similar to
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), it fits a linear model to the data to predict the
number of cases expected in a given category (Field, 2000). In the present
log-linear analyses, second-order effects of interest are the relationship of (1)
the criterion variable with gender and (2) the criterion variable with life stage
cohort; highest-order effects reflected an interaction of gender by life stage
cohort in relation to the criterion variable. Multivariate Analysis of Variance
(MANOVA), ANOVAs, and follow-up pairwise comparisons were conducted
when level (from low to high) of the dependent variable was of interest
(e.g., level of same-sex attraction). The nine individuals who identified as
transgender were grouped according to the gender with which they identified
(e.g., male-to-female transgender grouped with women).
413
LGBT = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender.
Personal identity variables
Self-identified sexual orientation
1 = Exclusively lesbian/gay
2 = Mostly lesbian/gay
3 = Bisexual
4 = Mostly heterosexual
5 = Heterosexual
Outness (1 = not out, 7 = very out)
Relational identity variables
Same-sex physical attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Same-sex emotional attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Other-sex physical attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Other-sex emotional attraction (1 = low, 5 = high)
Sexual behavior
Never had sex
(1 = own gender only, 5 = other gender only)
Polyamorous
1 = Yes
2 = No
Relationship status
1 = Single
2 = Casually dating
3 = Long-term dating
4 = Married/partnered
Community identity variables
Connected/involved with LGBT community
(1 = not at all, 5 = extremely)
Connected/involved with bisexual community
(1 = not at all, 5 = extremely)
Variables
—
11
77
12
—
19
25
75
46
14
26
14
40
51
156
96
29
54
28
(%)
1.90
.86
3.44
1.71
18
12
21
49
41
59
1
2.60
43
29
51
117
98
142
3
1.13
1.18
2.43
3.43
4.00
3.86
3.94
3.74
.87
1.09
1.00
.99
3.08
M
4.32
4.01
3.91
4.00
—
8
76
16
—
(%)
Early Adulthood
3.31
—
20
181
38
—
N
1.15
.48
SD
3.08
3.00
M
Emerging Adulthood
—
23
159
24
—
N
TABLE 2 Descriptive Data for Variables of Interest by Life Stage Cohort
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
1.04
1.15
.94
1.00
1.12
1.05
1.12
1.49
.49
SD
23
4
18
84
73
56
1
—
14
97
17
—
N
18
3
14
65
57
43
1
—
11
76
13
—
(%)
2.13
2.60
3.32
4.05
3.61
3.88
3.99
3.13
3.02
M
Middle Adulthood
1.06
1.16
.84
.97
1.21
1.02
1.02
1.54
.49
SD
414
3
6
−.14∗∗
.11∗∗
−.14∗∗
−.15∗∗∗
−.02
−.04
.06
.16∗∗∗ −.06
−.13∗∗
−.32∗∗∗
−.13∗∗
.33∗∗∗
.01
.30∗∗∗ −.02
.51∗∗∗ −.16∗∗∗
.31∗∗∗
.19∗∗∗
−.12∗∗
.04
.08
.02
—
8
.07
−.17∗∗∗
.14∗∗
—
9
−.02
−.12∗∗
.13∗∗
.16∗∗∗
—
10
—
11
.08
−.05
−.04
.20∗∗∗ −.17∗∗∗ −.12∗∗
−.09∗
.45∗∗∗ −.16∗∗∗
.36∗∗∗ −.04
−.05
—
7
−.12∗∗∗ −.02
−.02
.16∗∗∗ −.05
.05
.23∗∗∗ −.24∗∗∗ −.15∗∗∗
.08
−.01
−.05
5
−.10∗
—
4
—
.05
—
−.16∗∗∗
.01
−.25∗∗∗
—
2
.38∗∗∗
.07
.01
.11∗
—
−.10∗
.01
−.26∗∗∗
−.25∗∗∗ −.06
.16∗∗∗ −.36∗∗∗ −.09∗
−.12∗∗ −.20∗∗∗
.02
.02
—
.33∗∗∗
1
.53∗∗∗
—
12
Note. LGBT = lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender.
Participants who reported that they never had sex were excluded from analyses involving sexual behavior. N ranged from 528 to 576 due to missing data. Please
refer to Table 1 for variable coding key.
∗ p < .05, ∗∗ p < .01, ∗∗∗ p < .001.
1. Life stage cohort
2. Gender
Personal identity variables
3. Outness
4. Sexual orientation
Relational variables
5. Relationship status
6. Polyamorous
7. Same-sex physical
attraction
8. Other-sex physical
attraction
9. Same-sex emotional
attraction
10. Other-sex emotional
attraction
11. Sexual behavior
Community variables
12. Involvement in LGBT
community
13. Involvement in
bisexual community
Variable
TABLE 3 Intercorrelations among Variables of Interest
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
M. E. Brewster and B. Moradi
415
Personal Identity Variables
Downloaded by [Walden University] at 08:29 23 December 2017
SEXUAL ORIENTATION
A three-way log-linear analysis was conducted with Gender, Life Stage Cohort
and Sexual Orientation (mostly lesbian/gay, bisexual, mostly heterosexual).
The likelihood ratio of this model was χ 2(0) = 0, p = 1, and the analysis
indicated that a second-order effect was significant, χ 2(8) = 84.45, p < .001,
but the highest-order interaction of Life Stage Cohort × Gender × Sexual
Orientation was not significant. To further decompose this finding, followup Pearson chi-square tests were conducted on the second-order effects
of interest (i.e., Gender × Sexual Orientation, Life Stage Cohort × Sexual
Orientation). These tests revealed that Gender had a small association with
Sexual Orientation, χ 2(2) = 14.47, p < .01, V = .16; a greater proportion of
men than women identified their orientation as mostly lesbian/gay (men =
14%, women = 7%) and mostly heterosexual (men = 18%, women = 11%),
whereas a greater proportion of women than men identified as bisexual
(men = 68%, women = 82%). Life Stage Cohort was not related significantly
to Sexual Orientation. Thus, Gender but not Life Stage Cohort was associated
with self-identified Sexual Orientation, with a greater proportion of women
than men describing their sexual orientation as bisexual.
OUTNESS
An ANOVA was conducted in which Life Stage Cohort, Gender, and their
interaction were examined with level of outness as the dependent variable.
There was a small main effect of Gender, F(1, 570) = 22.53, p < .001, η2 =
.04, which was qualified by a small Gender × Life Stage Cohort interaction,
F(2, 570) = 8.66, p < .001, η2 = .03; however, there was no significant main
effect for Life Stage Cohort. Pairwise comparisons to interpret the significant
Gender × Life Stage Cohort interaction effect indicated that emerging adult
women (M = 3.07, SD = 1.10) reported lower levels of outness than women
in early adulthood (M = 3.52, SD = 1.44, t[570] = −2.88, p < .01) and women
in middle adulthood (M = 4.05, SD = 1.38, t[570] = −4.13, p < .001); the latter
two cohorts also differed significantly, t(570) = −2.20, p < .05. Men’s level
of outness did not differ significantly across emerging adulthood (M = 3.13,
SD = 1.32), early adulthood (M = 3.00, SD = 1.52) and middle adulthood
(M = 2.70, SD = 1.43). Women also reported greater outness than men in
early (women: M = 3.52, SD = 1.43; men: M = 3.00, SD = 1.52; t[570] =
2.94, p < .01), and middle (women: M = 4.05, SD = 1.38; men: M = 2.70,
SD = 1.43; t[570] = 5.27, p < .001) adult cohorts, but women’s and men’s
outness did not differ significantly in emerging adulthood (see Figure 1).
Thus, emerging adult women in this sample reported lower outness than
did women in early and middle adult cohorts, whereas men across life stage
cohorts reported similar levels of outness.
416
Journa