(PS6-13) Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Sexual Orientation Concealment Scale Among Nonbinary LGBTQ+ Adults

Abstract Text: Sexual orientation concealment is a prevalent minority stressor among LGBTQ+ people and is associated with higher levels of adverse behavioral and mental health symptomatology (e.g., anxiety, depression, general distress, problematic eating behaviors). It is critical to understand nonbinary people’s experiences of minority stress in particular, as nonbinary people have relatively higher levels of mental health challenges and experience minority stressors in different ways than cisgender LGBTQ+ people. The Sexual Orientation Concealment Scale (SOCS), developed in 2016, is a widely used, brief (six-item) Likert-type measure assessing sexual orientation concealment behaviors over the previous two weeks. Although the SOCS has been used with diverse cisgender populations, its validity for nonbinary people (including those of diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds and sexual identities) remains unknown. Based on data from an international sample of 340 nonbinary LGBTQ+ adults, 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 Color [BIPOC]) and sexual identity (i.e., monosexual, bi+, and queer). The model fit the data well for the originally proposed one-factor solution. Regarding factorial invariance, the one-factor model fit the data well for both white and BIPOC groups. Item 2 on the scale (concealment by avoiding contact with other LGB individuals) had a stronger factor loading for the BIPOC group compared to the white group. Otherwise, partial metric and scalar invariance were observed, indicating general invariance across racial/ethnic identities. Partial metric and scalar invariance were also observed across sexual identities. Once again, Item 2 was the only item with noticeable differences in factor loadings, with higher loadings for monosexual and queer individuals compared to bi+ individuals. Taken together, these findings show that the SOCS is internally valid for use with nonbinary people in general and provide preliminary support for its use across racial/ethnic and sexual identity groups. Findings attest to the utility of the SOCS for use with nonbinary people in various mental health and primary care settings, especially given its brief, self-report format. For instance, a high SOCS score in a primary care setting may signal a need for referral to evidence-based psychotherapy, and a high SOCS score in a mental health setting suggests that discussing concealment in psychotherapy (e.g., providing psychoeducation, identifying cognitive distortions) using LGBTQ+-affirming strategies may be vital. We outline several directions for future investigation to increase the cohesion of this body of work, such as replicating these findings with more racially diverse and larger samples.