G ender and sexually diverse (GSD) youth are marginalized and resilient individuals whose voices need to be represented in practice and research (Mayberry, 2013). The American Psychological Association (APA) and National Association of School Psychologists (NASP; 2015) Joint Resolution on gender and sexual orientation diversity for children and adolescents enforces these ideals, calling for inclusive practice (see Chapter 1, this volume, for details). It calls for the inclusion of gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation in school district policies and for inclusive data collection in research. However, barriers (e.g., requiring parental consent) prevent GSD youth from participating in research or seeking mental health services, or both, that do not affect their cisgender, heterosexual peers.Informed consent is an ethical practice that researchers and practitioners routinely use in health, mental health, and education settings (Dorn et al., 1995;Roth-Cline & Nelson, 2013). It is a voluntary agreement to participate in practice or research. Informed consent typically includes signing a form acknowledging the participant consents to and comprehends what the research or practice entails. Minors, however, are typically required to have a parent or guardian consent on their behalf because their capacity is

Research rarely explores LGBTQ+ youth bullying in the context of culture-specific outcomes (e.g., LGBTQ+ identity development) and what can mitigate the impact of peer stressors. This study used a concurrent mixed methods design to explore how experiences of peer victimization predicted LGBTQ+ youth’s identity development (i.e., stigma sensitivity, concealment motivation, and difficult process) and whether social support and outness served as protective, moderating factors. The mixed-methods approach provides a culture-specific context via qualitative inquiry to inform whether the quantitative findings align with how youth qualitatively discuss their experience of bullying, negative outcomes, and social support. Our sample consisted of 349 LGBTQ+ youth 14-17 years old who completed a survey (quantitative sample), and a subset of 39 LGBTQ+ youth who completed a semi-structured interview (qualitative sample). Our quantitative findings indicated that greater overall peer victimization was positively related to LGBIS-revised subscales of stigma sensitivity, concealment motivation, and difficult process, where both outness and social support moderated such relations. Qualitatively, victimized youth also reported stigma sensitivity and concealment motivation, while also endorsing how being out and having a support system played a role in their experience of being victimized. These qualitative findings align with our quantitative findings that classmate support mitigated the effects of peer victimization on difficulty of coming out. Implications for practitioners and researchers are provided.

No abstract

Research rarely explores LGBTQ+ youth bullying in the context of culture-specific outcomes (e.g., LGBTQ+ identity development) and what can mitigate the impact of peer stressors. This study used a concurrent mixed methods design to explore how experiences of peer victimization predicted LGBTQ+ youth’s identity development (i.e., stigma sensitivity, concealment motivation, and difficult process) and whether social support and outness served as protective, moderating factors. The mixed methods approach provides a culture-specific context via qualitative inquiry to inform whether the quantitative findings align with how youth qualitatively discuss their experience of peer victimization, negative outcomes, and social support. Our sample consisted of 349 LGBTQ+ youth 14–17 years old who completed a survey (quantitative sample) and a subset of 39 LGBTQ+ youth who completed a semi-structured interview (qualitative sample). Our quantitative findings indicated that greater overall peer victimization was positively related to LGBIS-revised subscales of stigma sensitivity, concealment motivation, and difficult process, where both outness and social support moderated such relations. Qualitatively, victimized youth also reported stigma sensitivity and concealment motivation while also endorsing how being out and having a support system played a role in their experience of being victimized. These qualitative findings align with our quantitative findings that classmate support mitigated the effects of peer victimization on the difficulty of coming out. Implications for practitioners and researchers are provided.