Factor analysis of modified LGBT minority stress scale for BIPOC LGBTQ+ American population

This study examined the validity and dimensional structure of a shortened, modified version of the LGBT Minority Stress Measure that was used with a US BIPOC LGBTQ+ population (n=168) in the Loss of Safe Spaces project, a project that explored minority stress and ambiguous loss during the COVID-19 pandemic (Gutierrez et al., 2025). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using a weighted least squares mean and variance-adjusted (WLSMV) estimator (i.e., for predicting ordinal item responses) to assess the fit of the initial four-factor Minority Stress Measure model, with hypothesized factors of Identity Concealment, Everyday Discrimination/Microaggressions, Internalized Stigmatization, and Victimization Events. The initial model demonstrated mediocre fit (CFI = .817, TLI = .841, RMSEA = .087, SRMR = .123). Using theoretical justification and local model fit diagnostics, a refined five-factor model was developed that separated the Everyday Discrimination/Microaggressions factor into two separate factors of Invalidation as well as Othering/Tokenizing. The factors of Identity Concealment, Internalized Stigmatization, and Victimization Events were retained. The refined model showed some improvement (CFI = .860, TLI = .878, RMSEA = .081, SRMR = .107). Future analysis and refinement is needed with a larger sample size. Implications include the importance of validating measures to marginalized groups, as BIPOC LGBTQ+ individuals may experiences minority stress concepts differently than white LGBTQ+ populations.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Iowa Research Online (The University of Iowa)
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25820/etd.008198
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Factor analysis of modified LGBT minority stress scale for BIPOC LGBTQ+ American population

Kalen Donovan Zeiger
Iowa Research Online (The University of Iowa)
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

Factor analysis of modified LGBT minority stress scale for BIPOC LGBTQ+ American population

Kalen Donovan Zeiger
article en

Abstract

This study examined the validity and dimensional structure of a shortened, modified version of the LGBT Minority Stress Measure that was used with a US BIPOC LGBTQ+ population (n=168) in the Loss of Safe Spaces project, a project that explored minority stress and ambiguous loss during the COVID-19 pandemic (Gutierrez et al., 2025). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using a weighted least squares mean and variance-adjusted (WLSMV) estimator (i.e., for predicting ordinal item responses) to assess the fit of the initial four-factor Minority Stress Measure model, with hypothesized factors of Identity Concealment, Everyday Discrimination/Microaggressions, Internalized Stigmatization, and Victimization Events. The initial model demonstrated mediocre fit (CFI = .817, TLI = .841, RMSEA = .087, SRMR = .123). Using theoretical justification and local model fit diagnostics, a refined five-factor model was developed that separated the Everyday Discrimination/Microaggressions factor into two separate factors of Invalidation as well as Othering/Tokenizing. The factors of Identity Concealment, Internalized Stigmatization, and Victimization Events were retained. The refined model showed some improvement (CFI = .860, TLI = .878, RMSEA = .081, SRMR = .107). Future analysis and refinement is needed with a larger sample size. Implications include the importance of validating measures to marginalized groups, as BIPOC LGBTQ+ individuals may experiences minority stress concepts differently than white LGBTQ+ populations.

Iowa Research Online (The University of Iowa)
Reduced inequalities, Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.