性和性别少数群体能从普通夫妻关系教育中受益吗?:个体和关系功能的比较利益

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Family Process Pub Date : 2025-05-15 DOI:10.1111/famp.70047
Mengiln Wei, Francesca Adler-Baeder, Julianne McGill
{"title":"性和性别少数群体能从普通夫妻关系教育中受益吗?:个体和关系功能的比较利益","authors":"Mengiln Wei,&nbsp;Francesca Adler-Baeder,&nbsp;Julianne McGill","doi":"10.1111/famp.70047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Couple relationship education (CRE) programs have been widely implemented across the nation for decades and serve an increasingly diverse population of couples; however, effectiveness studies have continued to focus on the experiences of the “average” participant, thus overlooking the experience of minoritized populations. Few studies have centered on the experiences of sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals, especially those who identify as SGM but are in different-gender appearing relationships. Using a sample of 153 SGM CRE participants (80% cisgender women, 52% identified as bisexual or pansexual, 57% had a different-gender partner) and 2061 non-SGM participants who are racially and economically diverse, this study compared baseline differences and post-program growth trajectories between SGM and non-SGM participants in relationship quality, skills, mental, and physical health symptoms. Results show that SGM and non-SGM participants have similar average levels of relationship functioning and skills at baseline, but SGM participants report more mental health symptoms and lower sleep quality, on average. Following propensity score matching, growth curve models indicated no differences in the significant growth for both groups from baseline to 6 months in relationship quality, skills, and sleep quality, suggesting similar benefits. However, a significant interaction effect indicated that SGM participants improved more in mental health symptoms compared to non-SGM participants. This is encouraging evidence that SGM individuals can benefit from general CRE and further validates efforts for inclusion.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51396,"journal":{"name":"Family Process","volume":"64 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals Benefit From General Couple Relationship Education?: Comparative Benefits in Individual and Relational Functioning\",\"authors\":\"Mengiln Wei,&nbsp;Francesca Adler-Baeder,&nbsp;Julianne McGill\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/famp.70047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Couple relationship education (CRE) programs have been widely implemented across the nation for decades and serve an increasingly diverse population of couples; however, effectiveness studies have continued to focus on the experiences of the “average” participant, thus overlooking the experience of minoritized populations. Few studies have centered on the experiences of sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals, especially those who identify as SGM but are in different-gender appearing relationships. Using a sample of 153 SGM CRE participants (80% cisgender women, 52% identified as bisexual or pansexual, 57% had a different-gender partner) and 2061 non-SGM participants who are racially and economically diverse, this study compared baseline differences and post-program growth trajectories between SGM and non-SGM participants in relationship quality, skills, mental, and physical health symptoms. Results show that SGM and non-SGM participants have similar average levels of relationship functioning and skills at baseline, but SGM participants report more mental health symptoms and lower sleep quality, on average. Following propensity score matching, growth curve models indicated no differences in the significant growth for both groups from baseline to 6 months in relationship quality, skills, and sleep quality, suggesting similar benefits. However, a significant interaction effect indicated that SGM participants improved more in mental health symptoms compared to non-SGM participants. This is encouraging evidence that SGM individuals can benefit from general CRE and further validates efforts for inclusion.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Family Process\",\"volume\":\"64 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Family Process\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/famp.70047\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Process","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/famp.70047","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

夫妻关系教育(CRE)项目已经在全国范围内广泛实施了几十年,服务于日益多样化的夫妻群体;然而,有效性研究继续侧重于“一般”参与者的经验,从而忽略了少数群体的经验。很少有研究集中在性少数和性别少数(SGM)个体的经历上,特别是那些认同为SGM但处于不同性别表现的关系中的个体。本研究使用153名SGM CRE参与者(80%为顺性女性,52%为双性恋或泛性恋,57%有不同性别的伴侣)和2061名种族和经济不同的非SGM参与者的样本,比较了SGM和非SGM参与者在关系质量、技能、心理和身体健康症状方面的基线差异和项目后的增长轨迹。结果表明,SGM和非SGM参与者在基线时的关系功能和技能的平均水平相似,但SGM参与者报告的平均心理健康症状更多,睡眠质量更低。根据倾向评分匹配,增长曲线模型显示,从基线到6个月,两组在关系质量、技能和睡眠质量方面的显著增长没有差异,表明类似的益处。然而,显著的交互效应表明,与非SGM参与者相比,SGM参与者在心理健康症状方面改善更多。这是令人鼓舞的证据,表明SGM个体可以从一般CRE中受益,并进一步验证了纳入的努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Can Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals Benefit From General Couple Relationship Education?: Comparative Benefits in Individual and Relational Functioning

Couple relationship education (CRE) programs have been widely implemented across the nation for decades and serve an increasingly diverse population of couples; however, effectiveness studies have continued to focus on the experiences of the “average” participant, thus overlooking the experience of minoritized populations. Few studies have centered on the experiences of sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals, especially those who identify as SGM but are in different-gender appearing relationships. Using a sample of 153 SGM CRE participants (80% cisgender women, 52% identified as bisexual or pansexual, 57% had a different-gender partner) and 2061 non-SGM participants who are racially and economically diverse, this study compared baseline differences and post-program growth trajectories between SGM and non-SGM participants in relationship quality, skills, mental, and physical health symptoms. Results show that SGM and non-SGM participants have similar average levels of relationship functioning and skills at baseline, but SGM participants report more mental health symptoms and lower sleep quality, on average. Following propensity score matching, growth curve models indicated no differences in the significant growth for both groups from baseline to 6 months in relationship quality, skills, and sleep quality, suggesting similar benefits. However, a significant interaction effect indicated that SGM participants improved more in mental health symptoms compared to non-SGM participants. This is encouraging evidence that SGM individuals can benefit from general CRE and further validates efforts for inclusion.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Family Process
Family Process Multiple-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
5.10%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Family Process is an international, multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal committed to publishing original articles, including theory and practice, philosophical underpinnings, qualitative and quantitative clinical research, and training in couple and family therapy, family interaction, and family relationships with networks and larger systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信