Using Social Support Levels to Predict Sexual Identity Development Among Sexual Minority College Students

Background and Purpose: While empirical research has demonstrated the importance of developing a cohesive sexual identity, linking incomplete or poorly integrated sexual identities to a host of psychosocial difficulties among sexual minorities, significant empirical gaps remain regarding how best to support sexual minorities in the sexual identity development process. Accordingly, this study was designed to evaluate the effects of various types of social supports on sexual identity formation in young adults who identify as a sexual minority.

Methods: Eighteen to 24 year old college students from a Midwestern state who identified as a sexual minority were recruited through campus groups for sexual minorities, university academic departments, and community organizations that serve sexual minorities to complete an online survey. Social support levels were measured using a modified version of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), while sexual identity development was measured using the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale (LGBIS). The MSPSS was modified to include two additional domains of support, resulting in five domains (family, friends, significant others, campus groups for sexual minorities, and faith communities). The LGBIS encompassed eight aspects of sexual identity development (Acceptance Concerns, Concealment Motivation, Difficult Process, Identity Uncertainty, Internalized Homonegativity, Identity Affirmation, Identity Centrality, and Identity Superiority). Prior to further analysis, faith community support was removed due to not being correlated with any dependent variable. Three-step hierarchical multiple regression analyses were completed for each aspect of sexual identity development. To control for the time since initial disclosure of the participants’ sexual minority identity to others, this variable was entered as the first step. The second step added participants’ sexual identity category (gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other sexual minority) and the four domains of support were entered as the third step.

Results: Support from campus groups for sexual minorities provided the most positive effects on sexual identity development, reducing Internalized Homonegativity (β=-.362, p < .05), increasing Identity Affirmation (β=.549, p < .001) and Identity Centrality (β=.348, p < .05), and approaching significance on reducing Difficult Process (β=-.237, p < .10). Family members’ support contributed to reduced Internalized Homonegativity (β=-.260, p < .05) and approached significance on reducing Acceptance Concerns (β=-.227, p < .10). Supports from friends, supports from significant others, and time since initial disclosure had no impact on any aspects of sexual identity development. Identifying as bisexual, lesbian, or as a different sexual minority predicted increased Identity Uncertainty (β=.269, p < .10; β=.408, p < .01; β=.404, p < .01, respectively), while identifying as lesbian or bisexual reduced Identity Superiority (β=-.462, p < .01; β=-.580, p< .001, respectively).

Conclusion and Implications: This study demonstrates the importance of support from campus-based groups for sexual minority individuals and family members for the sexual identity development process among young adults in college who identify as a sexual minority. By expanding services to enhance positive supports from these domains, these young adults will be better able to navigate the sexual identity development process, leading to better integrated sexual identities and possibly reduced psychosocial difficulties.