Sexual identity development, Identity Disclosure, and Identity Exploration (Glover, Galliher, & Lamere, 2009)

Individual self-concept relating to sexuality, focused on orientation; 25 Items, Ages 14-21

Populations: Adolescents & Young Adults
Age ranges: 14-21
Languages: English
Countries: United States

Items

Items were not reported, items were described as below:

Item examples:

Participants reported various dating and sexual behaviors such as:
- had a crush on
- went steady with
- said “I love you”
- affectionate behaviors
- petting
- sexual intercourse
- Responses:
  - never
  - at least once in my life
  - at least once in the past year
  - currently.
Sexual attraction:
- Heterosexual
- Same-Sex
- Responses
  - Continuous ranging from 1 = not at all to 10 = very much
Traditional sexual orientation label used
- For self
- With others
  - gay/lesbian
  - straight
  - bisexual
  - questioning
Describe sexual orientation in own words
Predominant dating style
- Responses
  - same-sex romantic relationships
  - same-sex exclusively sexual relationships
  - same-sex passionate friendships
  - heterosexual dating
  - relationship withdrawal
Describe disclosure history

(Glover, Galliher, & Lamere, 2009)

Responses

Item response format varied by item, please see above

Scoring

Higher scores on the psychosocial subscales correspond to greater relation-esteem, relational
depression, relational preoccupation, and self-esteem.

Citations

Jenna A. Glover, Renee V. Galliher & Trenton G. Lamere (2009) Identity Development and Exploration Among Sexual Minority Adolescents: Examination of a Multidimensional Model, Journal of Homosexuality, 56:1, 77-101, DOI:10.1080/00918360802551555

Scoring breakdown

Measure development

Significant design input from young people
Cognitive interviews with young people
Expert input

Validity

Unknown: Face validity
Green: Convergent validity
Green: Construct validity

Reliability

Unknown: Internal consistency
Unknown: Test-retest

Ease of use

Unknown: Readability

Definitions

Face validity: How well a measure appears to represent the construct it is supposed to be measuring.

Convergent validity: How well a measure correlates with other hypothetically-related measures.

Construct validity: The extent to which a measure reflects the construct it was designed to evaluate.

Internal consistency: The extent to which items in a scale capture aspects of the same construct.

Test-retest: The degree to which measurement scores are consistent over a short period of time (usually 2 weeks).

Readability: The ease with which a reader can understand the questionnaire items.

Key

Green: Meets validation criteria
Red: Does not meet validation criteria
Unknown: Evidence not available