Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 10;50(3):925–959. doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01862-0

Table 3.

Study design, sample, setting, and mediators tested

Study Design Sample Setting/country Mediators tested
1. Almeida et al. (2009) Cross sectional

n = 1032

103 LGB, 929 non-LGB

Public high schools

Boston, USA

Perceived discrimination
2. Burns et al. (2016) Longitudinal

n = 4824

149 LGB, 4675 non-LGB

Community sample of adults

Australia

Major life events

Social support

Health and behaviors

Behavioral activation and inhibition

3. Burton et al. (2013) Longitudinal

n = 197

55 LGB, 137 non-LGB

Adolescent medicine clinics

Pennsylvania and Ohio, USA

Sexual minority specific victimization
4. Donahue et al. (2017) Cross sectional

n = 3987

331 LGB, 3656 non-LGB

Population-based sample of adolescent twins

Sweden

Victimization
5. Frisell et al. (2009) Cross sectional

n = 16,728

1241 had same-sex partners, 15,487 did not have same-sex partners

Population-based sample of adult twins

Sweden

Perceived victimization

Hate crime victimization

6. Frost and LeBlanc (2014) Cross sectional

n = 431

239 LGB, 192 non-LGB

Online study of adults

USA and Canada

Nonevent stress
7. Hatzenbuehler et al. (2008) Longitudinal

n = 1071

29 LGB, 1042 non-LGB

Middle schools

Connecticut, USA

Emotional regulation: emotional awareness and rumination
8. Hatzenbuehler et al. (2012) Cross sectional

n = 14,319

151 LG, 708 BI, 13,353 non-LGB

Nationally representative sample of adolescents

USA

Social isolation

Degree of connectedness

Social status

9. Hughes et al. (2014) Cross sectional

n = 1573

326 L, 124 ML, 27 BI 72 MH, 1573 non-LGB

Women from two large studies (national & Chicago Metropolitan area)

USA

Victimization
10. Krueger et al. (2018) Cross sectional

n = 14,216

11,756 concordant Ha, 539 LGB, 1406 MH, 515 discordanta H

Nationally representative sample of young adults

USA

Perceived stress
11. la Roi et al. (2016) Longitudinal

n = 1738

151 LGB, 1587 non-LGB

Large cohort study of adolescents

Five municipalities in the north of Netherlands (urban and rural)

Peer victimization

Parental rejection

12. Luk et al. (2018) Longitudinal

n = 2396

99 LGB, 2080 non-LGB

Nationally representative sample of adolescents and young adults

USA

Family satisfaction

Peer support

Cyberbullying victimization

Unmet medical needs

13. Luk et al. (2019) Longitudinal

n = 2012

1839 H, 37 LG, 104 BI, 32 Q

National cohort study of adolescents

USA

Cyber behaviors (weekday time spent on cyber behavior, weekend time spent on cyber behavior, social media use)
14. Martin-Storey and August (2016) Cross sectional

n = 251

93 LGB, 158 non-LGB

University and college students

Southwestern city, USA

Harassment due to gender nonconformity

Harassment due to sexual minority status

15. Martin-Storey and Crosnoe (2012) Cross sectional

n = 957

40 LGB, 917 non-LGB

Multi-site study of adolescents

USA

Harassment due to sexual minoritystatus

Self-concept

Self-regulation

Friendship quality

Parental support

Quality of the school environment

16. McLaren (2008) Cross sectional

n = 386

184 L, 202 non-LGB

Community sample of women

Victoria, Australia (urban, rural, regional areas)

Sense of belonging
17. McLaren et al. (2007) Cross sectional

n = 273

137 G, 136 non-LGB

Community sample of men

Australia

Sense of belonging
18. McLaughlin et al. (2012) Cross sectional

n = 13,962

227 LG, 245 BI, 13,490 non-LGB

National cohort study of adolescents/young adults

USA

Exposure to adversity
19. McNair et al. (2005) Cross sectional

n = 19,559

Younger cohort:

n = 9260

92 L, 75 BI, 634 MH, 8482 non-LB

Mid-age cohort:

n = 10,299

126 L, 16 BI, 122 MH, 10,035 non-LB

Large national sample of women

Australia

Stress

Abuse

Social support

20. Mereish et al. (2019) Cross sectional

n = 1129

839 H, 224 MH, 66 LGB

Children and adolescents in a large county in North Carolina

USA

Cyber victimization

Bias-based victimization

21. Miller and Irvin (2016) Cross sectional

n = 4769

95 LGB, 4674 non-LGB

Nationally representative sample of intimate partner violence survivors

USA

Type of victimization

Emotional support

22. Needham and Austin (2010) Cross sectional (baseline data as confounder)

n = 11,195

193 LG, 192 BI, 10,768 non-LGB

Nationally representative sample of adolescents and young adults

USA

Parental support
23. Oginni et al. (2018) Cross sectional

n = 162

81 Gay, 81 H

University sample

South-Western Nigeria

Family-related variables

Resilience

24. Pakula et al. (2016) Cross sectional

n = 222,548

2893 LG, 2225 BI, 217,652 non-LGB

Large national multi-year sample of adults

Canada

Perceived life stress
25. Pearson and Wilkinson (2013) Longitudinal

n = 11,601

770 LGB, 10,831 non-LGB

Nationally representative sample of adolescents

USA

Family relationships:

Perceived parental closeness

Parental involvement

Perceived family support

26. Przedworski et al. (2015) Cross sectional

n = 4673

232 LGB, 4441 H

National study of medical students

USA

Social stressors
27. Riley et al. (2016) Longitudinal

n = 1777

75 LGB, 1702 H

First year university students

USA

Stress

Coping styles

28. Robinson et al. (2013) Longitudinal

n = 4135

187 LGB, 3948 H

Nationally representative sample of young people

UK

Victimization
29. Rosario et al. (2014) Longitudinal

n = 6122

101, 101 BI, 611 MH, 5309 H

Cohort study of early adolescent children

USA

Attachment

Parental affection

30. Safren and Heimberg (1999) Cross sectional

n = 104

56 LGB, 48 non-LGB

Community sample of youth Philadelphia

USA

Social support

Coping

Stress

31. Sigurvinsdottir and Ullman (2016) Longitudinal

n = 905

95 BI, 810 non-LGB

Community sample of bisexual and heterosexual sexual assault women survivors

Chicago metropolitan area, USA

Perceived social support

Frequency of social contact

32. Smith et al. (2016) Cross sectional

n = 299

29 LGB, 270 non-LGB

Undergraduate psychology students in a large public university

Pacific Northwest, USA

Institutional betrayal
33. Shenkman et al. (2019) Cross sectional

n = 795

445 H, 350 LG

Online convenience/targeted sample

Israel

Attachment avoidance
34. Spencer and Patrick (2009) Cross sectional

n = 306

66 LG, 24 BI

Online convenience sample of young adults

USA

Social support

Personal mastery

35. Szalacha et al. (2017) Cross sectional

n = 8850

568 MH, 100 BI, 99 L, 8083 non-LB

National study of women

Australia

Interpersonal violence
36. Tate and Patterson (2019) Cross sectional

n = 15,701

14,973 H and MH, 248 BI, 340 LG

Large national sample of young adults

Mother relationship quality

Father relationship quality

Perceived stress

37. Teasdale and Bradley-Engen (2010) Longitudinal

n = 11,243

787 LGB, 10,456 non-LGB

Large national sample of adolescents

USA

Social stress

Social support

38. Ueno (2010) Cross sectional

n = 1492

64 had same-sex contact, 1428 did not have same-sex contact

Community sample of young adults

Miami-Dade, USA

Victimization

Major discrimination events

Daily discrimination

Negative life events

Chronic strains

Family support

Friend support

Optimism

Mastery

Self-esteem

Mattering

Fun-seeking orientation

Relationship status

Number of sexual relationships

Early first sex

Parents’ permissiveness of drug use

Friends’ permissiveness of drug use

Friends’ drug use

39. Wong et al. (2017) Cross sectional

n = 1076

142 LGB, 934 H

Multi-site university sample

China

Dating violence

Sexual orientation concealment

40. Woodford et al. (2014) Cross sectional

n = 2428

426 LGB, 2002 H

University students

Midwest, USA

Interpersonal mistreatment

LGB, lesbian, gay, bisexual; L, lesbian; ML, mostly lesbian; G, gay; BI, bisexual MH mostly heterosexual; H, heterosexual; Q, questioning

aConcordant H identified as heterosexual and their reported attractions and behaviors were all toward the opposite sex. Discordant H identified as heterosexual but reported same-sex attractions and/or behaviors