ArticlePsychology and sexuality2026
Confirmatory factor analysis and measurement invariance of the sexual orientation concealment scale among nonbinary LGBTQ+ adults.
Article in Psychology and sexuality, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sexual orientation concealment is a prevalent minority stressor among LGBTQ+ people (including nonbinary people) and it is associated with a series of adverse mental health outcomes. The Sexual Orientation Concealment Scale (SOCS) is a widely used brief measure assessing sexual orientation concealment. Although the SOCS has been used with diverse cisgender populations, its validity for nonbinary people, including those of varied racial/ethnic backgrounds and sexual orientations, remains unknown. Based on data from an international sample of 340 nonbinary LGBTQ+ individuals, the present study reports the findings of a confirmatory factor analysis to assess the one-factor structure and validity of the SOCS, as well as measurement invariance by racial/ethnic identity (i.e. white and Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour [BIPOC]) and sexual orientation (i.e. monosexual, bi+, and queer). The model fit the data well for the one-factor solution, and we observed partial scalar invariance by racial/ethnic identity and sexual orientation. These findings indicate that the SOCS is valid for use with nonbinary people and provide preliminary support for its use across racial/ethnic and sexual orientation groups. We outline implications for future investigation to increase the cohesion of this body of work, and for clinical practice with nonbinary people.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.