The role of minority stressors in lesbian relationship commitment and persistence over time.

Abstract

The Investment Model of relationship commitment uses interpersonal investment, relationship satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and commitment to predict relationship longevity (Rusbult, 1980, 1983). Although ample support for the Investment Model has been found in heterosexual couples, it appears to be less powerful in predicting stability in same-sex relationships (Beals, Impett, & Peplau, 2002), potentially because the model does not account for factors unique to same-sex relationships, such as anti-gay discrimination. However, no research has tested the nature and power of sexual minority stress factors in predicting same-sex relationship stability over time. Using secondary, longitudinal data collected from a diverse sample of lesbian women in relationships (N = 211), we examined how internalized homonegativity, sexual identity disclosure, and workplace discrimination affected the Investment Model antecedents of relationship persistence: satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and investment. We tested the influence of sexual minority stressors on Investment Model processes using structural equations modeling and found that sexual identity disclosure was positively associated with satisfaction and investment, internalized homonegativity was only negatively associated with satisfaction and investment, while workplace discrimination was negatively associated with alternatives. Moreover, both relationship satisfaction and investment influenced commitment which predicted persistence in these relationships over about seven years’ time, demonstrating support for the Investment Model. Our findings support the addition of sexual minority stress variables to the Investment Model when examining same-sex relationships and implications are discussed.

Effectiveness of an Intervention based on Peplau’s Model on Health Literacy among Nurses Who Smoke: A Quasi-Experimental Study

“…Interpersonal relationships are one of the measures to change viewpoints related to health behavior. Findings suggest that healthcare professionals need the support of leaders and peers, who play an important role in raising behavioral changes (Barrantes et al, 2017;Ogoncho, Sanga and Halake, 2017). The ability to understand behavior requires an approach to nursing theory.…”

Relationship commitment of Portuguese lesbian and gay individuals: Examining the role of cohabitation and perceived social support

“…Lastly, future studies should consider investigating to what extent cohabitation and social support serve as buffers against negative psychological outcomes (e.g., minority stress; Meyer, 2003) in same-sex relationships. There is already evidence that internalized homophobia and identity concealment lead to lower relationship satisfaction and investments and that workplace discrimination leads to poorer quality of alternatives (Barrantes et al, 2017). Just as social support is an important protective factor for the personal well-being and mental health of sexual minorities (Meyer, 2003), we expect it to be a protective factor for same-sex relationships.…”

“…Although the IM has been extended to same-sex relationships (e.g., Kurdek, 2008), research suggests that additional factors should be taken into account when examining these relationships. For instance, the percentage of variance explained by the IM is smaller in same-sex (vs. different-sex) relationships (Barrantes, Eaton, Veldhuis, & Hughes, 2017; Beals, Impett, & Peplau, 2002). Also LG individuals perceive cohabitation as a particularly important expression of their commitment (Haas & Whitton, 2015).…”

Associations between individual and couple-level minority stressors and relationship stress in queer women’s interracial/interethnic couple relationships

“…Queer women who have high levels of internalized bi-, trans-, or homophobia feel less comfortable with their sexual and gender identities. This discomfort has negative implications for intimate relationships (Berg, Munthe-Kaas, & Ross, 2016;Frost & Meyer, 2009;Mohr & Daly, 2008;Otis, Rostosky, Riggle, & Hamrin, 2006) by lowering relationship satisfaction, investment (Barrantes, Eaton, Veldhuis, & Hughes, 2017), and intimacy, and by increasing relationship problems and strain (Frost & Meyer, 2009).…”