Relying on an "Other" Category Leads to Significant Misclassification of Sexual Minority Participants
- PMID: 34097503
- PMCID: PMC8252904
- DOI: 10.1089/lgbt.2020.0449
Relying on an "Other" Category Leads to Significant Misclassification of Sexual Minority Participants
Abstract
Purpose: This study assessed which sexual minority participants selected "Other" if their identity was absent. Methods: This was an online survey; 905 participants saw a limited set of sexual orientation options (bisexual, gay/lesbian, heterosexual, other), and later in the same survey, saw an expanded list. Results: Twenty-one percent of participants chose different orientation labels across questions. When not presented with a "mostly heterosexual" option, 78% of mostly heterosexual participants chose "heterosexual"; 3% chose "other." However, when not presented with an "asexual" label, 100% of asexual participants chose "other." Conclusion: These findings suggest that "other" categories could misclassify a substantial proportion of sexual minority participants.
Keywords: mostly heterosexual; sexual orientation; sexuality; survey methodology.
Conflict of interest statement
No competing financial interests exist.
References
-
- Vrangalova Z, Savin-Williams R: Mostly heterosexual and mostly gay/lesbian: Evidence for new sexual orientation identities. Arch Sex Behav 2012;41:85–101 - PubMed
-
- Greaves LM, Barlow FK, Lee CHJ, et al. : The diversity and prevalence of sexual orientation self-labels in a New Zealand national sample. Arch Sex Behav 2017;46:1325–1336 - PubMed
-
- Scheffey KL, Ogden SN, Dichter ME: “The idea of categorizing makes me feel uncomfortable”: University student perspectives on sexual orientation and gender identity labeling in the healthcare setting. Arch Sex Behav 2019;48:1555–1562 - PubMed
-
- Bech M, Kjaer T, Lauridsen J: Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment. Health Econ 2011;20:273–286 - PubMed
-
- Sharp LM, Frankel J: Respondent burden: A test of some common assumptions. Public Opin Q 1983;47:36–53
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
