Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity/Expression in Adolescent Research:Two Decades in Review

There is a long history of research among adolescents who are minoritized and marginalized for their sexual orientation and gender identity/expression (SOGIE). However, it remains unclear how we can best conceptualize and assess SOGIE in adolescence, resulting in different subpopulations and findings across studies. Addressing this issue, we present a narrative literature review of the conceptualization and assessment of SOGIE, and provide recommendations for conceptualizing and operationalizing these concepts. Our review indicated that most research with adolescent populations still almost exclusively assesses isolated dimensions of sexuality and gender (e.g., attraction but not identity). We argue that to make research inclusive and equitable, scholars are required to make clear substantiated decisions and be transparent about the SOGIE dimensions and, thus, subpopulations they represent.</p

Are victims of bullying primarily social outcasts? Person-group dissimilarities in relational, socio-behavioral, and physical characteristics as predictors of victimization

Existing literature has mostly explained the occurrence of bullying victimization by individual socioemotional maladjustment. Instead, this study tested the person-group dissimilarity model (Wright et al., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50: 523–536, 1986) by examining whether individuals’ deviation from developmentally important (relational, socio-behavioral, and physical) descriptive classroom norms predicted victimization. Adolescents (N = 1267, k = 56 classrooms; Mage = 13.2; 48.7% boys; 83.4% Dutch) provided self-reported and peer-nomination data throughout one school year (three timepoints). Results from group actor–partner interdependence models indicated that more person-group dissimilarity in relational characteristics (fewer friendships; incidence rate ratios [IRR]T2 = 0.28, IRRT3 = 0.16, fewer social media connections; IRRT3 = 0.13) and, particularly, lower disruptive behaviors (IRRT2 = 0.35, IRRT3 = 0.26) predicted victimization throughout the school year

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity/Expression in Adolescent Research:Two Decades in Review

There is a long history of research among adolescents who are minoritized and marginalized for their sexual orientation and gender identity/expression (SOGIE). However, it remains unclear how we can best conceptualize and assess SOGIE in adolescence, resulting in different subpopulations and findings across studies. Addressing this issue, we present a narrative literature review of the conceptualization and assessment of SOGIE, and provide recommendations for conceptualizing and operationalizing these concepts. Our review indicated that most research with adolescent populations still almost exclusively assesses isolated dimensions of sexuality and gender (e.g., attraction but not identity). We argue that to make research inclusive and equitable, scholars are required to make clear substantiated decisions and be transparent about the SOGIE dimensions and, thus, subpopulations they represent.</p

Disparities in Perpetrators, Locations, and Reports of Victimization for Sexual and Gender Minority Adolescents

Purpose: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents are more likely to become victims of bullying and harassment than heterosexual, cisgender adolescents, but little is known about the contextual details of these victimization experiences. This study aims to examine by whom and where adolescents are bullied or harassed, to whom adolescents report such victimization, and whether these experiences differ between SGM and heterosexual, cisgender adolescents. Methods: Participants in this nationally representative study were 29,879 students (mean age = 14.1) from 136 Dutch middle/high schools across grades 7–12 (14.5% sexual minority, 2.7% gender minority) who completed a survey about their school-based experiences. Results: Perpetrators of victimization of SGM students were more often teachers and school staff compared with heterosexual, cisgender adolescents. Furthermore, SGM students experienced victimization in private locations (in the rest- or changing rooms/parking lots, at home), more often than heterosexual, cisgender students. Finally, SGM students felt less safe than their heterosexual, cisgender peers to report these experiences to teachers or parents, and were more likely to report their experiences to the police or the school janitor. SGM students who reported victimization experiences were less likely to receive support: the problems were less often acted on and persisted more often than those of heterosexual, cisgender students. Conclusions: SGM adolescents are not only victimized more often, but also by different perpetrators (teachers, other school staff) and in more private places. Their victimization is also less likely to be recognized or acted on by those responsible for adolescent's safety: teachers or parents

Disparities in Perpetrators, Locations, and Reports of Victimization for Sexual and Gender Minority Adolescents

Purpose: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) adolescents are more likely to become victims of bullying and harassment than heterosexual, cisgender adolescents, but little is known about the contextual details of these victimization experiences. This study aims to examine by whom and where adolescents are bullied or harassed, to whom adolescents report such victimization, and whether these experiences differ between SGM and heterosexual, cisgender adolescents. Methods: Participants in this nationally representative study were 29,879 students (mean age = 14.1) from 136 Dutch middle/high schools across grades 7–12 (14.5% sexual minority, 2.7% gender minority) who completed a survey about their school-based experiences. Results: Perpetrators of victimization of SGM students were more often teachers and school staff compared with heterosexual, cisgender adolescents. Furthermore, SGM students experienced victimization in private locations (in the rest- or changing rooms/parking lots, at home), more often than heterosexual, cisgender students. Finally, SGM students felt less safe than their heterosexual, cisgender peers to report these experiences to teachers or parents, and were more likely to report their experiences to the police or the school janitor. SGM students who reported victimization experiences were less likely to receive support: the problems were less often acted on and persisted more often than those of heterosexual, cisgender students. Conclusions: SGM adolescents are not only victimized more often, but also by different perpetrators (teachers, other school staff) and in more private places. Their victimization is also less likely to be recognized or acted on by those responsible for adolescent's safety: teachers or parents

Are victims of bullying primarily social outcasts? Person-group dissimilarities in relational, socio-behavioral, and physical characteristics as predictors of victimization

Existing literature has mostly explained the occurrence of bullying victimization by individual socioemotional maladjustment. Instead, this study tested the person-group dissimilarity model (Wright et al., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50: 523–536, 1986) by examining whether individuals’ deviation from developmentally important (relational, socio-behavioral, and physical) descriptive classroom norms predicted victimization. Adolescents (N = 1267, k = 56 classrooms; Mage = 13.2; 48.7% boys; 83.4% Dutch) provided self-reported and peer-nomination data throughout one school year (three timepoints). Results from group actor–partner interdependence models indicated that more person-group dissimilarity in relational characteristics (fewer friendships; incidence rate ratios [IRR]T2 = 0.28, IRRT3 = 0.16, fewer social media connections; IRRT3 = 0.13) and, particularly, lower disruptive behaviors (IRRT2 = 0.35, IRRT3 = 0.26) predicted victimization throughout the school year