Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Arch Sex Behav. 2016 Mar 23;45(6):1329–1346. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0694-6

Table 4.

Means (standard deviations) of items and subscales, factor loadings, factor correlations and reliabilities from the final model

Lesbian (full sample, n=1187) Bisexual (n=641) Unsure (n=353)
Self-
stigma
Ia
Self-
stigma
IIa
Sexual
prejudice
Self-
stigma
I
Self-
stigma
II
Sexual
prejudice
Self-
stigma
I
Self-
stigma
II
Sexual
prejudice



Items: Mean (SD)b Factor loadingsc Mean (SD) Factor loadings Mean (SD) Factor loadings



1. not good 1.79 (1.20) .80 2.25 (1.29) .83 2.43 (1.33) .85
2. not normal 1.88 (1.32) .77 2.24 (1.36) .83 2.51 (1.40) .86
3. not healthy 1.55 (1.02) .90 2.12 (1.33) .88 2.22 (1.34) .85
4. can’t 1.58 (1.07) .86 2.10 (1.31) .88 2.39 (1.44) .82
7. wrong to family 2.65 (1.50) .75 3.12 (1.46) .73 3.19 (1.48) .77
8. hard on self 1.89 (1.25) .90 2.29 (1.34) .90 2.52 (1.40) .85
9. wish not 1.92 (1.29) .90 2.55 (1.47) .94 2.73 (1.48) .87
10. want change 1.80 (1.24) .85 2.58 (1.51) .89 2.70 (1.49) .85
12. H not normal 1.50 (1.01) .93 1.75 (1.17) .91 1.98 (1.27) .95
13. H against nature 1.57 (1.07) .90 1.81 (1.22) .90 2.01 (1.30) .91
14. H morally wrong 1.35 (0.82) .90 1.50 (0.97) .90 1.68 (1.11) .84



Factor correlationsc Factor correlations Factor correlations
SS-IIa SPa SS-II SP SS-II SP
SS-Ia .76 .67 SS-I .83 .69 SS-I .80 .64
SS-IIa .51 SS-II .54 SS-II .54



Subscales: Mean (SD)b Ordinal
alpha
Cronbach’s
alpha
Mean (SD) Ordinal
alpha
Cronbach’s
alpha
Mean (SD) Ordinal
alpha
Cronbach’s
alpha
Self-stigma I 1.70 (0.92) .90 .80 2.18 (1.13) .91 .87 2.39 (1.17) .91 .87
Self-stigma II 2.07 (1.02) .91 .85 2.63 (1.24) .92 .88 2.78 (1.22) .89 .85
Sexual prejudice 1.47 (0.85) .93 .85 1.69 (0.99) .93 .85 1.89 (1.09) .93 .86
a

Self-stigma I (or SS I) = Self-stigma: Not normal/wholesome. Self-stigma II (or SS II) = Self-stigma: Self-reproach and wishing away same-sex sexuality. SP = Sexual Prejudice.

b

SD = standard deviation. Means and SDs were calculated on the items’ raw scale.

c

Factor loadings and factor correlations were from confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The CFA model fits very well to both the lesbian sample (CFI=.99, TLI=.99, RMSEA=.056, RMSEA 90% CI=(.048,.064), chi-square(191.47, 41df) p-value<.0001) and the bisexual sample (CFI=.99, TLI=.99, RMSEA=.067, RMSEA 90% CI=(.056,.078), chi-square(158.84, 41df) p-value<.0001), and moderately well to the unsure sample (CFI=.99, TLI=.99, RMSEA=.070, RMSEA 90% CI=(.055,.086), chi-square(112.72, 41df) p-value<.0001).