Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Therapeutic effects of a psychoeducational group intervention for enhancing self-validation of gay men Fraser, John William 1994

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1994-0267.pdf [ 1.62MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054040.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054040-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054040-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054040-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054040-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054040-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054040-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054040-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054040.ris

Full Text

Therapeutic Effects of a Psychoeducational Group Interventionfor Enhancing Self-Validation of Gay MenByJohn William FraserB.A., Dalhousie University, 1988A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF ARTSinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES(Department of Counselling Psychology)We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAApril 1994QJohn William Fraser, 1994In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(SinaDepartment ofThe University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate r /yDE-6 (2188)11AbstractThe purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness ofusing a cross-cultural Self-Validation Model (Ishiyama, 1989) with agroup of seven gay men. This model was developed as a means ofexploring and understanding the nature of cross-cultural adjustmentdifficulties and feelings of loss and homesickness of young immigrantsand foreign students. The psychological components of this model havebeen identified as being invalidated for many gay men. It was suggestedthat by viewing gay issues from a cross-cultural adjustment perspective,more positive outcomes would follow in that these issues could beexplored in a more diversified and socially accepted framework. In thisstudy, the model was used to facilitate a group of gay men’s awarenessof their inner struggles and as a tool for exploring ways of accessingtheir internal and external validation resources and expanding them. Itwas predicted that the use of the model in a group format would be aneffective therapeutic tool for working with gay men. The NungesserHomosexual Attitudes Inventory (Nungesser, 1979), Social AvoidanceTendency Scale (Ishiyama, 1992), Self-Critical Cognition Scale(Ishiyama, 1989), and Coopersmith Self—Esteem Inventory: Adult Form(Coopersmith, 1987) were used to assess the therapeutic effectiveness ofthe model. A one group pre-post repeated measures design was used.Seven subjects were assessed both before and after participation in aten week self-validation intervention program. Individual interviewswere conducted on the fourth week after the program was completed toassess each subject’s experience in the group. There was a significant111difference between the pre-test and post-test means of the Self-EsteemInventories (t = -3.71, df = 6, < .01) and the Nungesser HomosexualAttitudes Inventories (t = -2.90, df = 6, < .027). This providedsupport for the use of the Self-Validation Model with gay men. Therewas no significant difference between the pre-test and post-test meansfor the total scores of the Self—Critical Cognition Scale and the SocialAvoidance Tendency Scale. The qualitative data collected from theinterviews provided additional support for the use of the Self-Validation Model as a therapeutic tool with gay men. It was reportedthat the opportunity to discuss personal issues in the broad contextthat the model provided was particularly helpful and appreciated.Family disclosure was found to be an important component ofpsychological health. Some subjects reported that attempting tointegrate a positive gay identity with their ethnic identity posed aserious challenge to their sense of well-being. The results of thisstudy supported the notion that gay issues can be appropriatelyconsidered in the area of cross-cultural counselling. This. hasimportant implications for providing efficient therapeutic models forcounselling gay men. Models which focus too narrowly on the effects ofinternalized homophobia may lead individuals to over generalize theirnegative feelings about being gay to encompass the entire self. Themodel in this study recognized and affirmed all aspects of self and thevalue and meaning of personal existence and as such provided a usefulframework for helping participants achieve a healthy identity andimproved psychological health.ivTable of ContentsAppendix D. Outline of workshop (sessions 1 through 10)Appendix E. Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes InventorySubscalesAppendix F. Self-Critical Cognition SubscalesAbstract iiTable of Contents ivList of Tables vList of Figures viAcknowledgement viiIntroduction 1Review of Literature 5Method 11Subjects 11Procedure 13Questionnaires 15Data Analysis 20Results 22Discussion 38References 46Appendices 48Appendix A. Recruitment Notice 48Appendix B. Questionnaires 49Appendix C. Reference list of articles and work sheetshanded out during workshop 67757982VList of TablesTable 1 Subjects’ demographic information 12Table 2 Means, standard deviations, and paired samples t-tests onthe measures 23Table 3 Subjects’ post—test ratings on family members reactionsto disclosing their homosexuality 35Table 4 Summary of qualitative data on the subjects’ workshopexperience 37viList of FiguresFigure 1 Individual subjects’ scores on Coopersmith Self-EsteemInventory: Adult Form . . . 24Figure 2 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Total scores 25Figure 3 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Subscale I; Attitudes toward self 27Figure 4 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Subscale II; Attitudes toward others . . . 28Figure 5 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Subscale III; Attitudes toward disclosure . 29Figure 6 Self-Critical Cognition Scale:Total scores 30Figure 7 Self-Critical Cognition Scale:Factor 1; Negative self-processing 32Figure 8 Self-Critical Cognition Scale:Factor 2; Failure in positive self-processing 33Figure 9 Social Avoidance Tendency Scale 34viiAcknowledgementI thank Dr. Ishu Ishiyama for the support, encouragement, andadvice he has given me throughout this study. The Self-ValidationModel, devised by Dr. Ishiyama, has provided me with a new understandingof myself and gay issues in general. I also wish to thank my othercommittee members, Dr. Mary Westwood and Dr. Jamie Wallin, for theirassistance with this study. I further wish to thank Jim Rogers for hiscontinued encouragement and support throughout the course of this study.1IntroductionGays and lesbians comprise approximately 10% to 15% of the overallpopulation, yet they are often referred to as a “hidden minority”because they remain invisible to psychologists in scientific,educational, and therapeutic work (Fassinger, 1991). Many complexfactors such as negative societal attitudes and stigmatization, fear onthe part of gay and lesbian students and clients, and lack of awarenessor knowledge on the part of researchers and service delivererscontribute to this invisibility. These issues potentially have manyharmful and even fatal effects on gays and lesbians in that societalhomophobia can become internalized and thus lead to problems such asdrug and alcohol abuse, depression, low self-esteem, self-hate, and inmany instances, suicide. Homophobia is defined as the fear and hatredthat characterizes reactions to gay people by family, friends, andsociety (Gonsiorek, 1988). Because gays and lesbians grow up learningthe same negative attitudes that nongays do this homophobia can becomeinternalized and thus further complicate an already complex process ofself-definition or identity formation. It can also lead to self-hatredand self-deprecation.Gonsiorek (1988) strongly suggested that understanding andmodifying the subtle manifestations of internalized homophobia areimportant steps in achieving mental health. Internalized homophobia isa powerful negative influence in many gay people’s lives. It seemsreasonable to suggest that their prior level of psychological health maynot adequately shield them from making a smooth adjustment to acquiring2a gay positive identity. Miranda and Storms (1989) found that self-labelling as a homosexual and self-disclosure of sexual orientation toothers were related to the development of a positive lesbian or gayidentity. They suggested that the development of a positive lesbian orgay identity is an important task in promoting the psychologicaladjustment of lesbians and gay men. When implementing counsellinginterventions with gay people, all these factors have to be considered.Recent research has started to promote a more positiveunderstanding of gay and lesbian issues and some affirmativepsychotherapeutic models have been proposed (Borhek, 1988; Coleman &Remafedi, 1989; Shannon & Woods, 1991). Several stage models have beendeveloped to describe the process that a gay person must go through inobtaining a positive gay identity (Cass, 1979; Troiden, 1988).Schneider (1991) stated that these models are useful if one takes intoconsideration the fact that this process infrequently progresses in anorderly, invariable way. In this sense, stage models may provide ageneral description of the process but do not adequately explain justhow this process takes place.Eisner (1982) (cited in Schneider, 1991) suggested that the comingout process consists of a number of sub-processes. Coming out has beendefined as the process of disclosing one’s homosexuality to others(D’Augelli, 1991). Developing a lesbian/gay identity and developing apositive evaluation of being lesbian/gay were identified as twocognitive sub-processes. Developing intimate relationships andestablishing contact with a lesbian/gay community were identified as two3behavioral sub-processes. Variability in the coming out process wasattributed to the fact that these sub-processes are independent and canproceed at different paces.Schneider (1991) stated that these four factors and conditionsthat facilitate movement through the coming-out process have, for themost part, not been systematically investigated. A study was conductedto identify those factors, with a focus on the development of agay/lesbian identity and the development of a positive evaluation ofbeing gay or lesbian. It was found that the most important milestone inestablishing a lesbian/gay-positive identity was contact with otherhomosexuals. By meeting other gays and lesbians, stereotypes, and mythssurrounding homosexuality were belittled. When young people meet otherslike themselves they can see that it is possible for them to feelpositive about their own sexuality and, as a result, they experienceless conflict about labelling themselves as being gay. Contact withpeers also gives gay adolescents the needed opportunities to experimentsexually, to establish relationships, and to learn those social skillswhich come into play when people are romantically and/or eroticallyinterested in each other. As gay adolescents realize that they canenjoy their sexuality, they are reassured that they will not be alone oralienated. This helps them develop a positive feeling about being gayor lesbian and enhance improvement in their quality of life.Unfortunately, one of the biggest obstacles in this area is thatestablishing the contact that is necessary for facilitatingpsychological health is often very difficult. Based on these results,4it appears that psychotherapeutic interventions that incorporate all thefactors mentioned above will be more successful than those that are morenarrowly focused. The process of acquiring a positive gay identityinvolves both emotional and behavioral components. Support groups havebeen identified as valuable resources for gay and lesbian adolescents inthat they provide emotional support and understanding from peers(Gonsiorek, 1988). The opportunity for developing specific socialskills does exist in this context, however, more direct andstraightforward information is not always provided.5Review of LiteratureIt appears that if a skill/competency component was incorporatedinto a support group format, the process of acquiring a gay positiveidentity may be better facilitated. Ishiyama (1989) has developed aSelf-Validation Model which utilizes support, competency-building, andskills-training components. This could provide a very useful model forworking with gay and lesbian clients. Self-validation in this model hasbeen defined as “the process of restoring and reinforcing the sense ofself—worth, meaning in life, and personal identity and competencethrough a variety of activities and interactions with the natural andsocial environments, and transcending these qualities to a spirituallevel.” (Ishiyama, 1987, p. 7). This Self-Validation Model recognizesand affirms all aspects of self and the value and meaning of personalexistence and may provide a useful framework for helping gay peopleachieve a healthy identity and improved psychological health. Fivema.jor thematic components of self-validation have been identified inthis model. They are (a) security, comfort, and support, (b) self-worthand self-acceptance, (c) competence and autonomy, (d) identity andbelonging, and (e) love, fulfillment, and meaning in life. Thesepsychological components have been identified as being invalidated formany gay men and women. Therefore, it is suggested that the model canbe used to facilitate a gay individual’s awareness of their innerstruggles and as a tool for exploring ways of accessing the internal andexternal validation resources and expanding them.Despite current trends that view gay and lesbian lifestyles in a6more positive way, gay people still face social, legal, and religiousdiscrimination and this interacts with other forms of oppression such assexism and racism (Fassinger, 1991). Lesbian and Gay adolescents areparticularly vulnerable to these influences in that they are not alwayscapable of finding ways to validate their emerging gay identity in thiscontext. Their sense of security is undermined when they experience,first hand, a homophobic society. They quickly realize that they cannotalways rely on the same police and legal protection that heterosexualscan expect and they are open to harassment from literally anyone who mayphysically or verbally attack them simply for being gay (Borhek, 1988).They may lose support from family (Savin-Williams, 1989), friends,and/or co-workers because of their sexual orientation. Not knowingwhere to look for this needed support, they may find themselves feelingalone and abandoned. Pincu (1989) argued that the more oppressive asociety or culture is, the more likely that persons may engage inanonymous sex as a substitute for denied intimacy. In light of therecent AIDS epidemic, teaching gay individuals how to find genuinesupport and understanding seems crucial. By exploring these issueswithin the framework of the Self-Validation Model, gay and lesbianclients can learn how to find security, comfort, and support inalternative situations where social reinforcers are available.Issues of self-worth and self—acceptance can also be exploredwithin this framework. In this sense, internalized homophobia can leadto self-deprecation and self-rejection. By promoting being lesbian orgay as something to be valued, individuals can learn to find activities7and people which help them to experience a sense of unconditional self-worth and self-acceptance. By addressing myths and stereotypessurrounding homosexuality and by providing positive role models, gaypeople can learn to value themselves more highly.Gonsiorek (1988) stated that the effects of internalizedhomophobia may lead individuals to over-generalize their negativefeelings about being gay to encompass the entire self. In this sense,coming to terms with being gay may not only affect how a gay personfeels about him/herself, it may also affect their sense of competenceand autonomy in social, vocational, intellectual, physical, andfinancial areas. In relation to self-validation, gay people can behelped to understand that the issue of sexual orientation has nothing todo with credentials, training, and expertise. However, in manyinstances lesbian and gay men must be on guard at each step of theircareers. In these cases, a gay person can be validated by acknowledgingthe courage it takes to balance a stigmatized identity with certaincareer aspirations.Ishiyama (1989) has identified the area of social competence andautonomy as being one of the most important and fundamental. Thiscomponent involves learning tasks for enhancing the experience ofvalidating oneself and being validated by others. Acquiring andpractising social and communication skills, obtaining information,studying the social norms, developing relationships, asserting self,problem solving, accessing other’s resources, and seeking help fromothers have all been identified as skills that are necessary for social8survival and rewarding and effective living of foreign students. Theseskills are also necessary when someone is changing their perspectivefrom, “I am heterosexual’ to ‘I am homosexual’ (Schneider, 1991). Cain(1991) stated that many of the problems that confront many gay men areassociated with their covert existences, rather than with their sexualpreferences. In this respect, covertness was associated with a sense ofpowerlessness and incompetence. Teaching these skills to gays andlesbians when they are making this transition could, therefore,facilitate a sense of competence and autonomy.How one defines oneself, who and what activities helps to validatewho one is, and which groups and communities one feels a part of andwhy, are issues that have been identified within the identity andbelonging component of the Self-Validation Model. Self, in this model,can be defined at the physical, familial, social-cultural,transcultural-existential and/or transpersonal (collective andspiritual) levels depending on which aspects of self serves as the mostpowerful source of self-referencing. For many gay people, all of theselevels can be invalidated as a result of the stigmatization associatedwith being gay. In some cases a gay person can be disowned from his orher family because of their sexual orientation. This does not mean,however, that they can not develop a familial self. They can beencouraged to consider alternative family identities with close friends.In relation to social-cultural identity, gay community organizations canprovide much needed support and validation.In considering identity and belonging, it is important to9acknowledge and validate just where an individual is from adevelopmental perspective. Coming to terms with being gay has beenidentified as a difficult and painful process for many people (Borhek,1988; Gonsiorek, 1988). Not everyone, for example, is ready or capableof coming out to their parents. Homosexual identity development models(Cass, 1979; Troiden, 1988) take the position that it is possible for agay person to achieve a positive homosexual identity. However, sincesocial and cultural forces were emphasized in shaping sexuality andguiding its expression, it was argued that given current Westernattitudes, it would probably be impossible for someone to achieve ahomosexual identity that was totally (cognitively and affectively)congruent. In this sense, validating a positive gay identity involvesacknowledging the courage it takes in achieving these developmentalmilestones.The final component of the Self-Validation Model has beenidentified as the central theme in human existence. It entails aholistic dimension of love, fulfillment, and meaning in life. This coreof human existence is invalidated for many gay people in that theirdesire to love and be loved by another human being is considered by manyto be disgusting and immoral. Ritter and O’Neil (1989) stated asfollows: “Representatives and followers of traditional religion haveoften hurt lesbians and gay men by weaving a moral and historicaltapestry of guilt, shame, and repression rather than by providingvalidation and inspiration for their inherent goodness.” (p. 9). It isnot hard to imagine that this invalidation of the core of personal10existence may be reflected in feelings of lovelessness, emptiness, andmeaninglessness for many gay people. They can be validated, however, bypositively recasting images of gay and lesbian people and by working toreframe their losses into opportunities for growth and transcendence(Ritter & O’Neil, 1989; Struzzo, 1989).The components of the Self-Validation Model appear to provide acomprehensive perspective of gay and lesbian issues. Therefore, themodel seems appropriate for use with this population. The model has notbeen used on gays and lesbians before, and warrants investigation. Itis thus proposed that employing this model with gay clients in a groupformat will facilitate the process of acquiring a positive gay identity.More specifically, with the use of this model, it is hypothesized that agay person’s internalized homophobia, social avoidance, and selfcritical cognition will be reduced and their self-esteem level willincrease.11MethodSublectsSubjects for this study originally consisted of eight gay men.However, one participant’s data were excluded from the analysis becauseextenuating circumstances in this subject’s life posed a threat to theinternal validity of the study. Information obtained during anindividual interview strongly suggested that his post-test performancewas more indicative of an emotionally upsetting circumstance than anypossible treatment effect. The remaining seven subjects were betweenthe ages of 20 and 29 years. The mean age for the seven subjects was23. For further demographic information; see Table 1.Subjects were recruited by advertising in gay studentorganizations, on a gay-oriented notice board, and in a communitynewspaper; See Appendix A. By recruiting in this way, respondentstended to be individuals who were already in the process of coming outand identified themselves as being gay. There was a total of twelveresponses to the recruitment process. After the initial orientationsession, four subjects decided not to continue with the workshop as itdid not meet their individual needs. Originally, recruitment was forgay males between the ages of 19-26, but due to a low response rate,this age range was increased to include respondents between the ages of19 and 29. Respondents were screened over the telephone to determine ifthe group would meet their needs.Because research has indicated that some issues may be differentfor lesbians and gay males (Schneider, 1991), only males were selected12Table 1 Subjects’ demographic information (N=7)Age Education Occupation Youth Ethnicity‘ Environment51 22 2nd year Student Rural CanadianCollegeS2 22 University Student Urban CanadianS3 28 College Sales Rural CanadianS4 21 1st. year Student Urban PersianUniversityS5 20 University Student Urban Ismaili/CanadianS6 21 Bachelor of Accountant Urban Chinese!Commerce CanadianS7 29 Secondary Clerical Urban British/CanadianNote. Table 1 represents individual subjects’ (S1-S7) demographicinformation. The mean age is 23.29. The youth environmentcategory indicates where subjects spent most of their youth.Responses under Ethnicity represent how subjects most stronglyidentify themselves.13for this study. Cain (1991) stated that the social situation of lesbianwomen is sufficiently different from gay men to warrant separateanalysis.ProcedureThere were ten-two hour weekly sessions for the group. In thefirst session, an orientation to the study was given and group normswere established. The pre-treatment questionnaires were administered asa complete package in a specified order; See Appendix B. In the finalsession, subjects were given an opportunity to reflect back on theirexperience in the group and the post-treatment questionnaires wereadministered. The group was involved in a counselling intervention thatconsisted of eight weekly group workshops. The facilitator of theseworkshops was a 29-year old gay male. He was in a Master of Arts programin Counselling Psychology and was trained in both group and individualcounselling as part of this program.Gay issues were explored within the framework of the Self-Validation Model originally devised by Ishiyama (1989). This was doneby exploring each of the five major thematic components of the model inweekly sessions. The model was introduced by asking the principalquestions that have been identified for each of the components. Forexample, the security, comfort, and support component of the model wasintroduced by asking the question: ‘How do you make yourself feelsecure, supported, and at home, and who and what kind of activitiescontribute to generating such feelings in you?” (Ishlyama, 1989, p.43).Self—worth and self-acceptance was introduced by asking: “In what ways14do you value yourself highly, and what activities and which persons helpyou to experience a sense of unconditional self-worth and self-acceptance?” (Ishiyama, 1989, p. 45). Competence and autonomy wasintroduced by asking: “In which activities and aspects of life do youfeel competent and autonomous and who helps you appreciate the competentand autonomous self?” (Ishiyama, 1989, p. 46). Identity and belongingwas introduced by asking the question: “How do you define yourself, whoand what activities help you validate the sense of who you are, andwhich groups and communities do you feel part of and why?” (Ishiyama, P.48). Love, fulfillment, and meaning in life was introduced by asking:“What and who give you meaning in life, a sense of fulfillment, and theopportunities to experience love and caring for self and others, andwhat would make your life more meaningful and fulfilling?” (Ishiyama,1989, p. 52).Learning and practising specific skills and competencies that havebeen identified as necessary in each of the components of the model wasalso a part of the workshop. For example, issues of assertiveness wereaddressed through role playing personally relevant concerns. Self-exploration work sheets were provided so subjects could get a bettersense of where they were at in relation to self-esteem and supportnetworks; See Appendix C. Strategies for improving subjects’ selfesteem and support networks were discussed following these exercises.Subjects were also taught how to use a validationgram; See Appendix C.This work-sheet encouraged participants to explore what relationships,things, activities, and places were validating and invalidating within15the context of the different components of the Self-Validation Model.This gave subjects the opportunity to learn how to better validatethemselves. (For a complete session outline consult Appendix D.)Audio recorded individual interviews were conducted four weeksafter the last session of the workshop. The interviews wereapproximately one hour in length and conducted by the workshopfacilitator. The interviews followed a structured format consisting ofa series of questions, including one used in the analysis. Qualitativedata derived from the individual interviews were organized intosummarized statements of subjects’ responses to the question: In whatways was the workshop helpful/meaningful to you?questionnairesA wide range of demographic information was gathered includingage, education, occupation, if subjects were raised in urban and/orrural environments, ethnic background, if subjects had disclosed theirhomosexuality to family and/or co-workers, if subjects consideredthemselves to be a religious person, if subjects were currently involvedin any support groups or individual counselling, HIV status, alcohol anddrug use, involvement in gay organizations, and relationship status (SeeAppendix B).The Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory (Nungesser, 1979) wasused as a general index of internalized homophobia (See Appendix B). Theinventory consisted of a series of attitude statements generated fromthree categories. Items relating to attitudes toward the fact of one’sown homosexuality consisted of reactions to one’s own behaviour or16attraction (specific instances of behaviour, thoughts and feelings) andreactions to being homosexual. Items relating to attitudes towardshomosexuality in general and toward other male homosexuals consisted ofnegative traits of homosexuals, or an absence of positive ones,attitudes concerning the legal status of homosexuality and attitudesconcerning morality, biology and the value of homosexuality (is it good,bad or natural? better, worse or just as good?). Items concerningattitudes toward the fact of one’s homosexuality being known by othersincluded reactions the homosexual has toward others’ knowing andoppressive expectations the homosexual has toward others’ knowing of hishomosexuality. These three attitude statements were used to categorizeitems into three subscales (Subscales I, II, and III respectively). Thespecific items were not adequately provided by Nungesser (1979). Forthe purposes of this study these items were arranged according to thecategories given for each of the subscales (See Appendix E). For thetotal score, a high score indicated low homophobic prejudice and a lowscore indicated high homophobic prejudice. A high score on subscale I,indicated someone who felt positively about their homosexuality and alow score indicated someone who had a negative homosexual identity. Ahigh score on subscale II indicated someone who felt positively aboutother homosexuals and a low score indicated someone who had negativeattitudes and stereotypes regarding homosexuals. A high score onsubscale III indicated someone who was not overly sensitive to theexpression and self-presentation of information regarding theirhomosexuality and a low score indicated someone who was overly concerned17with the appropriateness and consequences of the presentation andexpression of their homosexuality, and controlled their presentation toa greater extent. Reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) for eachof the subscales and for the full scale were reported to have rangedfrom .67-.95. In order to maximize internal consistency, an itemanalysis was performed to discriminate between high and low test scores,and intermediate responses.The Social Avoidance Tendency Scale was constructed by Ishiyama(1992) as a measure of social avoidance tendency (See Appendix B). Thescale covers a wide range of anxiety-provoking social activities inacademic and non-academic social settings. Fifteen social situationswere chosen and reworded from other sources. They included eating anddrinking with other people, being the focus of attention, talking topeople in authority, being criticized or confronted by others, speakingor acting before an audience, mixing with strangers in socialsituations, asserting onets rights and saying “nofl to others,confronting or disagreeing with others, being a group leader, expressingideas and feelings in class, dealing with verbally aggressive people,initiating conversation with an attractive person of the opposite sex(“of the opposite sex” was removed for the purposes of this study),asking questions and asking for clarification in relatively largegroups, being uncertain and possibly making mistakes or saying wrongthings in front of others, and being praised and getting complimentsfrom others in large groups. Ishiyama (1992) reported that the scalewas evidenced to have high internal consistency (alpha= .89; n=7l) and a18test-retest reliability of r(71)= .76 with a 6.5-week interval. Theconstruct validity of the scale was supported by meaningful correlationswith measures of other social anxiety scales. Since other’s reactionsto an individual’s homosexuality can be anxiety provoking, this measurewas considered appropriate.The Self-Critical Cognition Scale (Ishiyama & Munson, 1993) wasused to measure self-critical and self-defeating cognitive tendency inprocessing self-relevant information (See Appendix B). Using orthogonalrotations, this scale was found to consist of two factors with thesecond factor loading exclusively on reverse-scored items (See AppendixF). Factor 1 was interpreted as negative self-processing and Factor 2was interpreted as a failure in positive self-processing. The twofactors correlated with each other at r = .65. It was suggested thatself—critical information processing is two-dimensional (i.e.,positive/nonpositive and negative/nonnegative, instead of positive-negative). The developers of this scale consider it useful forproviding a more direct assessment of a self-critical mode ofinformation processing for researchers in the areas of personality,psychotherapy, and social psychology. Because the present study seeksto explore the suitability of applying a psychotherapeutic model to agroup of subjects this scale was considered appropriate. This scale wasevidenced to have high internal consistency (alpha= .89; n=56l) and atest-retest reliability of r(l38)= .81 with a 6.5-week interval. Theconstruct validity of the scale was supported by correlations withmeasures of self-esteem, social anxiety, distress, shyness, fear of19negative evaluation, depression, and negative adjective counts inspontaneous adjective listing in a self-descriptive task. Correlationsranged from r=.34 to r=.72.The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory: Adult Form (Coopersmith,1987) was used as a measure of self-esteem (See Appendix B). It wasstated that the language and situations in the adult form were adaptedfrom the school short form for use with persons over 15 years of age.This was to make the items more meaningful to persons whose lives arenot as closely bound to parents and school as are children’s. Self-esteem refers to the evaluation a person makes, and customarilymaintains, of themselves. Overall Self-esteem is defined as anexpression of approval or disapproval, indicating the extent to which aperson believes themselves competent, successful, significant, andworthy. Since these beliefs have been incorporated within the Self-Validation Model, this Self-Esteem Inventory was considered anappropriate measure for this study. The inventory reportedly has enoughreliability and validity to recommend its use in research (Peterson,1985). Reliability data based on a number of studies have reported KR20 ranges from .87 to .92 for grades four to eight. Reliability datafor the adult form was not reported in the manual. The correlationbetween the school form and the adult form exceeded .80 for threesamples of high school and college students. Peterson (1985) statedthat there is an impressive amount of information on the constructvalidity of the Self-Esteem Inventory and that the inventories are amongthe best known and most widely used of the various self-esteem measures.20Data AnalysisThis study used a one group pre-test post-test design. Subjectswere measured both before and after exposure to the Self-ValidationModel. The dependant variables were the pre-test and post-test scoresfrom the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory: Adult Form, the NungesserHomosexual Attitudes Inventory, the Self-Critical Cognition Scale, andthe Social Avoidance Tendency Scale. The independent variable was theSelf-Validation Model. Data were analyzed using matched pairs t-testsbased on a SPSS-X program to determine if there were any statisticallysignificant differences between pre and post scores.Data on subjects’ rating of reactions to disclosing theirhomosexuality to self-reported family members was also analyzed. Thisdata was obtained from question 6 of the background information sectionof the post-test package (See Appendix B).It was predicted that scores for the Self-Esteem Inventory wouldshow a statistically significant increase in the post—test. This wouldindicate that the Self-Validation Model would be effective in promotingimproved self-esteem. It was also predicted that the total scores forthe Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory would show a statisticallysignificant increase. Subscales I, II, and III of the NungesserHomosexual Attitudes Inventory were all expected to demonstrateconsistent improvement. This would indicate that the model would beeffective in reducing internalized homophobia in general and in relationto the specific subscales. Scores for the Self-Critical Cognition Scalewere expected to show a statistically significant decrease. This would21indicate that the Self-Validation Model was effective in decreasingself-critical and self-defeating cognitive tendency in processing self-relevant information. Scores for the Social Avoidance Tendency Scalewere expected to show a statistically significant decrease. It waspredicted that subjects disclosure ratings would be related topsychological health. The data obtained during the individualinterviews was collected and summarized to provide some qualitativeinformation on the effectiveness of the Self-Validation Model. Thisinformation was expected to provide additional support for the use ofthe Model. Causal inferences in this study were limited by not having acontrol group.22ResultsTable 2 shows the pre-test and post-test means, standarddeviations, and paired samples t-tests (N=7) for each of thequestionnaires. There was a significant difference between the pre-testand post-test means of the Self-Esteem Inventory (t = 3.71, < .01),the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory: Total Score (t 2.90,.027), the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory: Subscale I ( =2.99, < .024), the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory: SubscaleIII (t = 3.32, < .016), and the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Factor2 (t = 2.58, < .042). There was no significant difference between thepre-test and post-test means of the Nungesser Homosexual AttitudesInventory: Subscale II, the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Total Score,the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Factor 1, and the Social AvoidanceTendency Scale.The results of this data support the hypothesis that participationin the self-validation workshop significantly influenced gayparticipants’ self-esteem and internalized homophobia. Figure 1represents subjects’ individual and mean pre-test and post-test scoresfor the Self-Esteem Inventory. As can be seen in Figure 1, allsubjects’ self-esteem levels increased. Figure 2 represents subjects’individual and mean pre-test and post-test scores for the NungesserHomosexual Attitudes Inventory. Six out of seven subjects demonstrateddecreased levels of homophobic prejudice in the post-test. Onesubject’s scores demonstrated no change in homophobic prejudice.Figures 3 through 5 represent subjects’ individual and mean pre-test and23Table 2 Means, standard deviations, and paired samples t—tests on themeasuresPre-Test Post-Test t value Degrees 2-Tailof Prob.FreedomSelf-Esteem Inventory: 12.14 7.36 20.00 4.51 3.71 6 .010 g.Adult FormNungesser Homosexual Attitudes 116.86 22.70 130.86 16.49 2.90 6 .027Inventory:__Total_ScoreNungesser Homosexual Attitudes 32.29 9.14 38.71 6.78 2.99 6 .024 gig.Inventory:__Subscale_INungesser Homosexual Attitudes 40.00 4.58 41.71 2.81 1.26 6 .254Inventory:_Subscale_IINungesser Homosexual Attitudes 44.57 11.25 50.43 8.48 3.32 6 .016 sig.Inventory: Subscale IIISelf-Critical Cognition Scale: 47.00 17.05 39.29 12.34 1.70 6 .141Total_ScoreSelf-Critical Cognition Scale: 29.29 10.05 26.14 8.73 1.08 6 .321Factor 1Self-Critical Cognition Scale: 17.71 7.23 13.14 4.22 2.58 6 .042 Big.Factor_2Social Avoidance Tendency Scale 57.00 16.90 50.00 14.54 1.42 6 .205Note. In the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory, Subscale I refersto attitudes toward the fact of one’s own homosexuality. SubscaleII refers to attitudes toward homosexuality in general, and towardother male homosexuals. Subscale III refers to attitudes towardthe fact of one’s homosexuality being known by others. In theSelf Critical Cognition Scale, Factor 1 and 2 were based on a twofactor solution found using orthogonal rotations. Factor 1 refersto negative self-processing. Factor 2 refers to a failure inpositive self-processing and loads exclusively on reverse-scoreditems.24Figure 1 Individual subjects’ scores on Coopersmith Self-EsteemInventory:Adult Form20 -24-22- /20 -1S-/I6-/ 414- 34 3 3‘N / ‘N ‘N ‘N ‘N12-10 -0-N N N /6- N N N4-/2- 4 330-- — -—SI 52 63 64 55 SO 57 k4eanPre-Test Post-TestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory: Adult Form.Scores in the upper quartile are indicative of high self-esteem,scores in the interquartile range are indicative of medium selfesteem and scores in the lower quartile are indicative of lowself-esteem. The lowest score possible is 0 and the highest scoreattainable is 25 (Coopersmith, 1981).25Figure 2 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Total scores170 -160 -150 -140-130-120-7\/\ /N N /\/ //60-/N \ /2 //\ //\N N / N / N N / N40-/s / //\\N /N /N N20-/s / /1o//NN NN /N /N NNSI 52 53 54 S5 56 S7 MeanEZI Pre-Test Post-TestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory. Highscores indicate low homophobic prejudice and low scores indicatehigh homophobic prejudice. The lowest score possible is 34 andthe highest score attainable is 170 (Nungesser, 1979).26post-test scores for subscales I, II, and III of the NungesserHomosexual Attitudes Inventory. Subscales I and III demonstrated astatistically significant treatment effect (t = 2.99, .024; t =3.22, < .016, respectively). There was a significant change insubjects’ attitudes toward their own homosexuality and toward the factof their homosexuality being known by others. Self-worth and self-acceptance were directly addressed in the Self-Validation Model and itis reasonable that the change in attitudes towards subjects’ ownhomosexuality was influenced by this aspect of the model.The results of the t-tests did not support the hypothesis thatparticipation in the self-validation workshop would significantlyinfluence subjects’ total score for the Self-Critical Cognition Scale.Figure 6 represents subjects’ individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for the Self-Critical Cognition Scale. By looking at this graphit can be seen that all but two subjects’ self-critical cognition scoresdecreased. The lack of a significant treatment effect was probably dueto these two subjects’ scores. There was also n.o statisticallysignificant difference between the pre an.d post test means of the SelfCritical Cognition Scale: Factor 1. This indicates that there was nosignificant change in subjects’ negative self-processing. There was,however, a statistically significant difference between the pre andpost-test means of the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Factor 2. Thisindicated that subjects became better in positive self-processing.27Figure 3 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Subscale I; Attitudes toward self50 -40 -N N230-N\N20- \ /\ ?10-0--”---SI S2 S3 54 55 56 S7 MeanZZJ Pre-Test Post-TestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for subscale I of the Nungesser Homosexual AttitudesInventory. Subscale I refers to attitudes toward the fact ofone’s own homosexuality. High scores indicate someone who feelspositively about his homosexuality and low scores indicate aperson who has a negative homosexual identity. The lowest scorepossible is 10 and the highest score attainable is 50 (Nungesser,1979).28Figure 4 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Subscale II; Attitudes toward others50 --xN/\40- \ /\ \ /\ \/\ N N/ /\30- /\ /\ N / N NN20 -10 -/\ /\ N / N /N /N0-—-.V/NNSI 32 33 34 35 SB 57 AeanPre-Test Post-TestNote. Subjects’ (51-57) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for subscale II of the Nungesser Homosexual AttitudesInventory. Subscale II refers to attitudes toward homosexualityin general, and toward other male homosexuals. High scoresindicate someone who feels positively about other homosexuals andlow scores indicate a person who has negative attitudes andstereotypes regarding homosexuals. The lowest score possible is10 and the highest score attainable is 50 (Nungesser, 1g79).29Figure 5 Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory:Subscale III; Attitudes toward disclosure70 -60 -72 7/ r/ 2N N //30-/ /N N \N/ /20-/ / / / / /10 -SI S2 53 54 55 36 57 MeanZZ Pre-Test Post-TeatNote. Subjectst (51-57) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for subscale III of the Nungesser Homosexual AttitudesInventory. Subscale III refers to attitudes toward the fact ofonets homosexuality being known by others. High scores indicatesomeone who is not overly sensitive to the expression and self-presentation of information regarding their homosexuality and lowscores indicate someone who is overly concerned with theappropriateness and consequences of the presentation andexpression of their homosexuality. The lowest score possible is14 and the highest score attainable is 70 (Nungesser, 1979).30Figure 6 Self-Critical Cognition Scale:80Total scoresa0)L0C)U)70 -60-50 -40-30-20 -10 -0SI 32 53 54 55 56 37 MeanPre-Test____Post-lestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre-test andscores for the Self-Critical Cognition Scale.indicate the more self-critical one tends toself-relevant information. The lowest scorethe highest score attainable is 78 (Ishiyama7-L____Npost—testHigh scoresbe in processingpossible is 13 and& Munson, 1993).31Figures 7 and 8 represent subjects’ individual and mean pre-test andpost-test scores for the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Factors 1 and 2,respectively. There was no statistically significant difference betweenthe pre-test and post-test means for the Social Avoidance TendencyScale. Figure 9 represents subjects’ individual and mean pre-test andpost-test scores for this scale. It can be seen that all but one of thesubjects’ social avoidance scores decreased. The lack of a significanttreatment effect might be attributed to this subject.Additional subject information was collected that was not examinedfor pre post-test comparisons. Table 3 consists of subjects’ ratings ofreactions to disclosing their homosexuality to self-reported familymembers. Reactions were categorized as: 1) very supportive andaccepting, 2) supportive and accepting with some reservation, 3)indifferent, 4) offended and 5) openly hostile and rejecting. Twosubjects indicated that they had not disclosed their homosexuality toany family members. Four subjects indicated family reactions as being1) Very supportive and accepting and 2) Supportive and accepting withsome reservation. One subject indicated reactions ranging from 1) Verysupportive and accepting to 3) indifferent. When one looks at theindividual scores on the various measures of the subjects who have notdisclosed their homosexuality, it can be seen that they scoredconsistently lower than other participants. The results of this data,therefore, support the idea that family disclosure may be an importantcomponent of psychological health.32Figure 7 Self-Critical Cognition Scale:Factor 1; Negative self-processing50 —40 -NF/ /\/ /\ ///\\ 7/\\20-/100-—— —____—— ——— ——SI 52 33 54 S5 57 MeanZZ Pro-Test Post-TestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre—test and post-testscores for the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Factor 1. Factor 1refers to negative self-processing. High scores indicate the moreself-critical one tends to be in processing self-relevantinformation. The lowest score possible is 8 and the highest scoreattainable is 48 (Ishiyama & Munson, 1993).33Figure 8 Self—Critical Cognition Scale:Factor 2; Failure in positive self-processing30-28-26- 424-4/ 714-12 -10 -8-_LV/IIlLSI S2 S3 54 35 36 S7 MeanPre-Test L5J Post-lestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for the Self-Critical Cognition Scale: Factor 2. Factor 2represents a failure in positive self-processing. High scoresindicate the more self-critical one tends to be in processingself-relevant information. The lowest score possible is 5 and thehighest score attainable is 30 (Ishiyama & Munson, 1993).34Figure 9 Social Avoidance Tendency Scale110-100 -90 -80 -7-70- // /\//0 __--- - - -61 62 63 64 65 66 57 MeanPre-Test Poet-TestNote. Subjects’ (S1-S7) individual and mean pre-test and post-testscores for the Social Avoidance Tendency Scale. High scoresindicate more social avoidance tendencies and low scores indicateless social avoidance tendencies. The lowest score possible is 15and the highest score attainable is 105 (Ishiyama, 1992).35Table 3 Subjectst post-test ratings on family members reactions todisclosing their homosexuality (N=7)Si S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7Mother 2-3 1 2 2Father 1 2 1 2Sister 1 11Brother 1 1 11 21) Very supportive and accepting2) Supportive and accepting with some reservation3) Indifferent4) Offended5) Openly hostile and rejectingNote. Responses indicate subjects’ (S1-S7) rating of reactions todisclosing their homosexuality to self-reported family members.Responses for some family members are not reported which indicateseither non-disclosure or that the rating does not apply to thissubject. A total lack of responses indicates non-disclosure.36Table 4 consists of summarized statements of subjects responses tothe question: In what ways was the workshop helpful/meaningful to you?Overall the responses from the subjects in table 4 provide support forthe effectiveness of using the Self-Validation Model with a group of gaymen. By looking at the responses it can be seen that the differentcomponents of the Self-Validation Model had a positive influence. Thesubjects’ summarized statements indicate specific components of themodel that were particularly helpful for their Self-Validation. Subject1 reported that the dimension of identity and belonging was quite usefulbecause he could now look at himself as being more than just a gayperson. The component of self-worth and self-acceptance was representedby Subject 4’s response, which indicated a positive influence. Subject6 indicated he feels less threatened with being gay. This relates tothe dimension of security, comfort, and support. Other components ofthe Self-Validation Model can be seen in the themes of the summarizedstatements from Table 4.37Table 4 Summary of qualitative data on the subjects’ workshopexperience (N7)Summarized StatementsSi - Different dimensions of validation encouraged me to look atthings I never looked at before.- Identity and belonging really clicked with me. I’m not just agay person.- Being accepted in the group was a big thing.S2 - It encouraged me to think about what kind of person I want tobe.- We all shared the common aspect of being gay but that was only apart of a bigger picture.- I Enjoyed seeing diversity of gay community versus stereotypes.S3 - Most helpful part of the group was the social aspect (meetingpeople). Being far away from friends and family and coming outagain in a new city, social validation was important.- Since the group I have had a different attitude. I am competentand I am valid.S4 - Education, hearing other’s coming out stories, seeing others whoare proud of being gay, and knowing that some parents areaccepting, helped me to develop a greater sense of self-worthand self-acceptance around being gay.- Seeing parallels to cross-cultural adjustment was very helpful.S5 - Hearing other people’s experiences and different perspectives onissues was helpful. It was validating in the sense of talkingand meeting other people.- My sense of identity and belonging was challenged more so thanvalidated.S6 - I feel more comfortable with being gay.- This was my first opportunity to talk about being gay in apositive environment. I feel less threatened with being gayexcept with family and work.- I can now start to integrate being gay as a fact of life.S7 - Parallels between the Self-Validation Model and personal beliefswere validating.- Enjoyed making friends with people who also want to grow.- Discussions around love, fulfilment and meaning in life werehelpful.Note. Table consists of summarized statements of subjects’ (Si-S7)responses to the question: In what ways was the workshophelpful/meaningful to you? This data was collected fromindividual interviews.38DiscussionThe Self-Validation Model used in this study was devised torecognize and affirm all aspects of self and the value and meaning ofpersonal existence. This provided a useful framework for helpingparticipants achieve a healthy identity and improved mental well-being.The different components of the model were indeed relevant to the issuesthat the individuals in the group were facing.The discussions around love, fulfillment, and meaning in life wereparticularly poignant. This was a topic that most subjects had notaddressed before. However, two individuals in the group were forced toaddress it because their homosexual identities conflicted with theirreligious beliefs. One subject reported that turning his back on hisreligion was very painful and that he had experienced a great loss indoing so. He reported that one of his dreams was to be able to say hisprayers in a gay positive environment. He was given the opportunity todo this in the group and this helped him to reexamine this issue in amore positive and accepting framework. After this he stated that he“could now see some light at the end of the tunnel”. This is animportant clinical issue that should be explored further in futureresearch.The component of identity and belonging was also found to berelevant in this investigation. Schneider (1991) found that the mostimportant milestone in establishing a lesbian/gay-positive identity wascontact with other homosexuals. In the present study subjects indicatedthat one of the most beneficial components of the Self-Validation Modelwas the opportunity to meet other gay people in a context where they39could discuss meaningful issues in a supportive environment. Thisdemonstrates the value of peer support. However, it is not clear ifparticipation in a support group would have the same therapeutic valueas participation in a validation training group. This issue warrantsfurther investigation.Some subjects reported that they enjoyed seeing the diversity ofparticipant’s backgrounds and that this helped to reduce manystereotypes they had of gay people in general. By exploring gayidentity issues as part of one’s overall identity, the concept ofidentity synthesis (Cass, 1979) was introduced. Identity synthesis wasreported as being the final stage that an individual moves through indeveloping an integrated identity as a person who is gay. This stageimplies the acceptance of one’s homosexual identity, a committedattitude against oppression, and an ability to synthesize the bestvalues of homosexual and heterosexual perspectives and to communicatewith members of the dominant group. Group members reported that thisdiscussion helped them to integrate their homosexual identity with allother aspects of self. Not all group members can be said to haveattained this stage. However, the data in this study indicated that allsubjects changed in this direction. It has been reported that thecoming out process can take several years (Cass, 1979). The fact thatsubjects in this group demonstrated significant change in a period often weeks, clearly supports the use of the Self-Validation Model withgay men.Overall the model was sensitive to the cultural diversity of thegroup. By promoting a gay positive identity some individuals40experienced a threat to their cultural and religious identities.Dworkin and Gutierrez (1989) stated that in order to counsel gayclients, counselling methods must be culturally relevant. Chan (1989),in addressing the issue of how an individual who is gay and a member ofan ethnic minority group comes to terms with identity issues, statedthat most respondents identified more strongly with their gay identitiesthan with their ethnic identities. However, it was indicated thatacknowledgement of both aspects of their identity would have beenpreferred. This created a conflict between the fear of stigmatizationin their ethnic community as a gay person versus the loss of support fortheir ethnic identity in the mainstream gay community. Loiacano (1989)stated that this dilemma has serious negative consequences on thedevelopment of a healthy gay identity. In the present study theseissues were quite relevant. Three of the participants stronglyidentified with their ethnic identities and they reported thatintegrating their gay identity with their ethnic identity was achallenge. Subject 4 reported that one common factor in the group wasbeing gay. Because of this he did not feel that his ethnic identity wasadequately validated. This issue has important therapeutic implicationsand further research in this area seems warranted.Another advantage of the Self-Validation Model is that it can besaid to have provided an environment which modeled how the issues ofsecurity, comfort, and support could be addressed. Subjects in thisstudy formed meaningful friendships with one another that extendedbeyond the boundaries of the group. This provided several members withan important support network. Disclosing one’s homosexuality to family41members was identified as an important source of support for severalparticipants in this study. Individuals who had not yet disclosed theirhomosexuality, reported that it was very encouraging to know that somefamilies were supportive and accepting. Savin-Williams (1989) foundthat the greater the degree of mother and father acceptance the morelikely an adolescent felt comfortable being gay. These results weredependent on the significance the parent was perceived to be for one’ssense of self-worth. The disclosure ratings of Table 3 indicated thattwo subjects had not come out to their respective families. When onelooks at their individual scores on the various measures it can be seenthat they scored consistently lower than other participants. Theresults of this study, therefore, support the idea that familydisclosure is an important component of psychological health.Gonsiorek (1988) stated that a challenge for gay individuals is todevelop a sophisticated decision-making process about disclosure,responding to prejudice and ostracism, and other potentially threateningsituations. Every gay person, at some time in their life, has to decidesuch things as when it is important to take a stand, what are theconsequences of action or inaction, and how a response should be pacedand timed. In order to do this they must learn to develop the skillsthat are necessary to perform a complex ‘cost benefit analyses(Gonsiorek, 1988). Subject 6 reported that he had not come out toanyone in his family and that disclosing his homosexuality to hisparents was not a good idea at this time. He reported that his ethnicbackground was Chinese. Therefore, coming out to his family would havea negative impact. The results of the post-test for subject 6 indicate42that he became more self-critical and socially avoidant. One possibleexplanation for these results may be that as this subject started tocome to terms with his sexuality he realized that his family values werechallenged and had to change. This subject also reported that he wasnot out to any of his co-workers and that he was very dissatisfied withhis present job. This lack of disclosure relates to his high score onthe Social Avoidance Tendency Scale and the Self-Critical CognitionScale.In this workshop, issues of security were addressed through anassertiveness role play. In this exercise someone acted out a extremelyverbally and potentially physically threatening person. These threatswere directed at the other participant simply because he was gay. Thisengendered much discussion and gave the group an opportunity to discussstrategies for dealing with homophobia in society.Ishiyama (1989) has identified the area of social competence andautonomy as being one of the most important and fundamental. Thiscomponent was utilized in the workshop by teaching tasks for enhancingthe experience of validating oneself and being validated by others.Several subjects indicated that this dimension of the model wasparticularly helpful. For example, one subject mentioned that theopportunity to practice being assertive was very helpful. He mentionedthat he had started to be more assertive in his interaction with hisfriends and that this improved his sense of competence and autonomy.Promoting being gay as something to be valued, positivelyinfluenced individual’s sense of unconditional self-worth and selfacceptance. The statistically significant difference between the pre43test and post-test means of the Self-Esteem Inventory supports thisnotion. Subscale I of the Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventoryreferred to attitudes toward the fact of one’s own homosexuality. Thefact that this scale also demonstrated a statistically significantdifference between the pre and post-test means also supports theeffectiveness of this component of the Self-Validation Model inpromoting psychological adjustment of gay men. Several subjectsreported that they felt more comfortable with being gay after theworkshop. One subject reported that through hearing other’s coming outstories, seeing others who are proud of being gay, and knowing that someparents are accepting, he developed a greater sense of self-worth andself-acceptance. By addressing myths and stereotypes surroundinghomosexuality and by providing positive role models participants wereable to value themselves more highly.McDermott, Tyndall, and Lichtenberg (1989) found that gay men tendto prefer gay counsellors. They also found that internalized homophobiawas found to predict discomfort in discussing various topics with acounsellor of unknown sexual orientation. It seems, therefore, thatwhen using the Self-Validation Model with gay clients, the facilitatorshould also be gay. By being a positive role model of a gay person whohas integrated his professional, personal, and vocational identities,the facilitator of this workshop may of been responsible for explainingsome of the improvement in subjects’ scores. It seems reasonable tosuggest that in the present study this was indeed a factor. Forexample, during one of the discussions on love, fulfillment, and meaningin life the facilitator self-disclosed his beliefs on spirituality.44Through describing the process that he went through in integrating hisspiritual identity with his gay identity, several participants werenoticeably moved.This study had some methodological limitations. The lack of acontrol group meant that no allowance was made for a comparison with thereactions of other subjects who were not exposed to the Self—ValidationModel. However, history, maturation, and instrumentation did not appearto be significant factors in this investigation and, therefore, theinternal validity of this study seemed intact. Participants in thisstudy were volunteers and, therefore, there was a possible volunteerbias. Due to the small sample size of this group, data must beperceived as exploratory and of limited generalizability.Social desirability was also an issue that may have affected the resultsof this study. For example, the fact that the interviews were conductedby the group facilitator, possibly influenced the subjects’ responses.The Self-Validation Model used in this study was developedas a means of exploring and understanding the nature of cross-culturaladjustment difficulties and feelings of loss and homesickness of youngimmigrants and foreign students. It was suggested that by viewing gayissues from a cross-cultural adjustment perspective more positiveoutcomes would follow in that these issues could be explored in a morediversified and socially accepted framework. This study appears to havebeen successful in supporting this view. Several researchers havesuggested that the negative experiences of gays “coming out” both tothemselves and to others may be better understood if approached from acultural adjustment perspective. For example McDermid, Tyndall, and45Lichtenberg (1989) stated that: “Because being gay or lesbian involves alifestyle different from that of the dominant culture, it may beappropriately considered in the province of cross-cultural counselling.”(p. 31). Buhrke (1989) also argued that “lesbian and gay issues can andshould be addressed in multicultural counselling courses.” (p. 79). Theresults of this study provided additional support for these arguments.They also have important implications in relation to providing a moreefficient therapeutic model for counselling gay men.46ReferencesBorhek, M. V. (1988). Helping gay and lesbian adolescents and theirfamilies. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 9, 123-128.Buhrke, R. (1989). Incorporating lesbian and gay issues into counsellortraining: A resource guide. Journal of Counselling andDevelopment, 68, 77-80.Cain, R. (1991). Stigma management and gay identity development. SocialWork, 36(1), 67—73.Cass, V. (1979). Homosexual identity formation: A theoretical model.Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 219-235.Chan, C. 5. (1989). Issues of identity development among Asian-Americanlesbians and gay men. Journal of Counselling andDevelopment,68, 16-20.Coleman, E., & Remafedi, G. (1989). Gay, lesbian, and bisexualadolescents: A critical challenge to counsellors. Journal ofCounselling and Development, 68, 36-40.Coopersmith, S. (1987). Self-Esteem Inventories. Palo Alto, CAN:Consulting Psychologists Press.D’Augelli, A. R. (1991). Gay men in college: Identity processes andadaptations. Journal of College Student Development, 32, 140-146.Dworkin, S. H. & Gutierrez, F. (1989). Introduction to special issue.Counsellors be aware: Clients come in every size, shape, colour,and sexual orientation. Journal of Counselling and Development,68, 6—8.Fassinger, R. E. (1991). The hidden minority: Issues and challenges inworking with lesbian women and gay men. The CounsellingPsychologist, 19(2), 157—176.Gonsiorek, J. (1988). Mental health issues of gay and lesbianadolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 2 114-122.Ishiyama, I. (1992). Unpublished Data: University of British ColumbiaIshiyama, I. (1989). Understanding foreign adolescent’s difficulties incross-cultural adjustment: A Self-Validation Model. CanadianJournal of School Psychology, 5, 41-56.Ishiyama, I, & Nunson, P. A. (1993). Development and validation of aSelf-critical Cognition Scale. Psychological Reports, 72, 147-154.Ishiyama, I. (1987). On self-validation. Heartwood: A Journal ofExperience, Expression, and Odyssey, 5(4), 7,16-18.47Loiacano, D. K. (1989). Gay identity issues among black Americans:Racism, Homophobia, and the need for validation. Journal ofCounselling and Development, 68, 21-25.McDermid, D., Tyndall, L., & Lichtenberg, J. (1989). Factors related tocounsellor preference among gays and lesbians. Journal ofCounselling and Development, 68, 31-35.Miranda, J., & Storms, N. (1989). Psychology adjustment of lesbian andgay men. Journal of Counselling and Development, 68, 41-45.Nungesser, L. G. (1979). Homophobia prejudice in homosexual males.Unpublished honors thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CAN.Peterson, C. (1985). Review of Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventories. InJ. N. Mitchell (ed.), The Ninth Mental Measurements Yearbook (pp.396-397). Lincoln, Nebraska: The University of Nebraska Press.Pincu, L. (1989). Sexual compulsivity in gay men: Controversy andtreatment. Journal of Counselling and Development, 68, 63-66.Ritter, K., & O’Neil, C. (1989). Moving through loss: The spiritualjourney of gay men and lesbian women. Journal of Counselling andDevelopment, 68, 9-15.Savin-Williams, R. C. (1989). Coming out to parents and self-esteemamong gay and lesbian youths. Journal of Homosexuality, 18(1-2),1—35.Savin-Williams, R. C. (1989). Parental Influences on the self-esteem ofgay and lesbian youths: A reflected appraisals model. Journal ofHomosexuality, 17(1-2), 93—109.Schneider, N. (1991). Developing services for lesbian and gayadolescents. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 10, 133-151.Shannon, J. W., & Woods, W. J. (1991). Affirmative psychotherapy for gaymen. Counselling Psychologist, 19, 197-215.Silberstein, L. R., Mishkind, N. E., Striegel-Noore, R. H., Timko, C., &Rodin, J. (1989). Men and their bodies: A comparison of homosexualand heterosexual men. Psychosomatic Medicine, 51, 337-346.Troiden, R. (1988). Gay and Lesbian Identity: A Sociological Analysis.New York: General Hall inc.48AppendicesAppendix A. Recruitment NoticeGAY MALES: 19T026Attitudes and circumstances intodays society can make theattainment of love, fulfilment, andmeaning in life a difficult andsometimes seemingly impossibletask. Learning how to validateoneself is one way to come closerto achieving these goals. If you area gay male between the ages of 19and 26 and would like toparticipate in this workshop orwould like more infonnation,contact John at:255-0920T}RE IS NO COST TO JO T}S GROUP.THE NAMES AND THE NATURE OF THE DISCUSSIONS WELL BE KEPTCONFIDENTIAL. PARTICIPATION sJ THE GROUP IS PART OF A M.A. THESISAT THE UNIVERSITY OF B.C.. DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELLINGPSYCHOLOGY.49Appendix B. QuestionnairesSELF-VALIDATIONANDPSCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENTOFGAY MENBACKGROUND INFORMATiON1. Age:2. Education:High School (last grade completed)TechnicalVocationalUniversity (degree)3. Occupation:4. I spent most of my youth in:___Urban environments.Rural environments.Combination of both.5. Ethnic background:506. Does anyone in your immediate family know that you aregay?YesNoIf yes, list their relationship to you. From the list, pleaserate their reactions to this knowledge in the space provided.Relationship Rating 1) Very supportive andaccepting2) Supportive and_____________accepting with somereservation3) Indifferent4) Offended5) Openly hostile andrejecting7. Do you think that your co-workers know that you are gay?YesNoIf yes, from the ratings in question 6, how would you ratetheir overall reaction to this knowledge?518. Do you consider yourself a religious person?___AbsolutelyTo a certain extentUndecidedIdo not think soAbsolutely notDo you attend church or belong to any religiousorganizations?YesNoIf Yes, describe:From the ratings in question 6, how would you rate theoverall reaction of the church or religious organization toyou being gay.9. Are you currently involved in any:_Support groupsIndividual counsellingIf yes, describe:10. In the past, have you been involved in any:Support groupsIndividual counsellingIf yes. describe:5211. What is your HIV status?___HIV negativeHIV positiveDo not KnowPrefer not to answer12. How would you describe your use of alcohol and/or drugs?No use at allModerate useHeavy use13. Are you involved with any gay organizations?YesNoIf yes, describe:14. Do you have a lover?YesNoIf yes, generally this relationship is:_Satisfying.Unsatisfying.53SELF-VALIDATiONANDPSYCHOLOGiCAL ADJUSTMENTOFGAY MENNUNGESSER HOMOSEXUAL ATTITUDES INVENTORYOn the following pages you will be shown a number of attitudestatements which •re personal and intimate in nature. Thesestatements pertain to sexual behaviour, and sexuality.Specifically, the statements fall into three categories: (1)attitudes toward the fact of one’s own sexuality: (2) attitudestoward homosexual men and homosexuality in general; (3)attitudes toward other people knowing of your own sexual Iaffectional preference.No two statements are exactly alike, so consider each statementcarefully before answering. We would like you to use theseattitude statements in order to DEscribe your own beliefs andattitudes. That is, we would like you to indicate, on a scale from‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’ how much you personallyendorse each statement. Please do not leave any statementunmarked.54EXAMPLE:1. Male homosexuals should not be allowed to teach inelementary schools.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRALAGREE STRONGLY AGREECwcie STRONGLYOSAGREE if you STRONGLY DISAGREE with the statement.Circle DISAGREE if you DISAGREE with the statement.Circle NEUTRAL if you are NEUTRAL in regard to this statement.Circle AGREE if you AGREE with this statement.Circle STRONGLYAGREE if you STRONGLY AGREE with this statement.Some statements may depict situations which you have notexperienced... Please imagine yourself in that situation whenanswering these statements.it is important that you answer as frankly and as honestly as youcan. Your answers will be kept in the strictest confidence, andbecause your responses are anonymous, your privacy will beprotected.1. When I am in a conversation with a homosexual man andhe touches me, it does not make me uncomfortable.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE2. I would not mind if my boss found out that I am gay.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRALAGREE STRONGLY AGREE3. Whenever I think a lot about being a homosexual, I feeldepressed.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAl.AGREE STRONGLY AGREE4. Homosexuality is not as good as heterosexuality.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRALAGREE STRONGLY AGREE5. When I tell my friends about my homosexuality, I do notworry that they will try to remember things about me thatwould make appear to fit the stereotype of a homosexual.RONGLY DISAGREE 2:SAGREE EUTRALAGREE STRONGLY AGREE556. I am glad to be gay.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE7. Male homosexuahty is a natural expression of sexuality inhuman males.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE8. When I am sexually attracted to a close male friend, I feeluncomfortable.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE9. I am proud to be a part of the gay community.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE10. Male homosexuals do not dislike women any more thanheterosexual males dislike women.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE11. Marriage between two homosexuals should be legalized.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE12. My homosexuality does not make me unhappy.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAl. AGREESTRONGLY AGREE13. Male homosexuals are overly promiscuous.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE14. When I am sexually attracted to another gay man, I do notmind if someone else knows how I feel.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE5615. Most problems that homosexuals have, have come fromtheir status as an oppressed minority, not from theirhomosexuality per se.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE16. When women know of my homosexuality, I am afraid theywill not relate to me as a man.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE17. Homosexual lifestyles are not as fulfilling as heterosexuallifestyles.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE18. 1 would not mind if my neighbours knew that I am gay.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE19. It is important for me to conceal the fact that I am gay frommost people.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE20. Whenever I think a lot about being a homosexual, I feelcritical about myself.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE21. Chosing an adult gay lifestyle should be an option forchildren.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE22. If my straight friends knew of my homosexuality, I would beuncomfortable.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE5723. If men knew of my homosexuality, I am afraid they wouldbegin to avoid me.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE24. Homosexuality is a sexual perversion.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE25. If it were made public that I am a homosexual, I would beextremely unhappy.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE26. If my peers knew of my homosexuality, I am afraid thatmany would not want to be my friends.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE27. Adult homosexual males who have sex with boys under 18years of age should be punished by law.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE28. If others knew of my homosexuality, I would not be afraidthat they would see me as being effeminate.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE29. I wish I were a heterosexual.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE30. When I think about coming out to a peer I am afraid theywill pay more attention to my body movements and voiceinflections.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE5831. I do not think I will be able to have a long term loverelationship with another man.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAl. AGREE STRONGLYAGREE32. I am confident that my homosexuality does not make meinferior.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE33. I am afraid that people wiU harass me if I come out morepublicly.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAl. AGREESTRONGLY AGREE34. When I think about coming out to a heterosexual malefriend, I do not worry that he might watch me to see if I dothings that are stereotypically homosexual.STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREENEUTRAL AGREESTRONGLY AGREE59SELF-VALIDATIONANDPSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENTOFGAY MENSOCIAL A VOIDANCE TENDENCY SCALEHow often do you tend to avoid the following situations? Pleaseindicate your avoidance tendency on the scale of I (almostnever) to 7 (almost always).1. Eating and drinking with other peopleI 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS2. Being the focus of attention1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS3. Talking to people in authority1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS4. Being criticized or confronted by others1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS605. Speaking or acting before an audience1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS6. Mixing with strangers in social situations1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS7. Asserting rights and saying “no” to others1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN8. Confronting or disagreeing with others1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS9. Being a group leader1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS10. Expressing ideas and feelings in class or a relatively largegroup (over 20 people)1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS11. Dealing with verbally aggressive people1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS12. Initiating conversation with an attractive person1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTENALWAYS6113. Asking questions and asking for clarification in a relativelylarge group (over 20 people)1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS14. Being uncertain and possibly making a mistake or saying awrong thing in front of others1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS15. Being praised and getting compilments from others in arelatively large group (over 20 people)1 2 3 4 5 6 7NEVER SOMETIMES OFTEN ALWAYS62SELF-VALIDATIONANDPSYCHOLOGiCAL ADJUSTMENTOFGAY MENSELF-CRITICAL COGNiTION SCALEWhen you think about yourself, how does your mind work?Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with thefollowing statements by circling appropriate responce.1. I am good at looking at myself critically while still remainingpositive towards myself.l.strongly 2.moderatky 3.sjigl,tly 4.slightly 5.moaeratiy 6.stronglydisagree disagree disagree agree agreeagree2. / tend to blow my weakness, limitations, and mistakesout of proportion in my thinking.l.strongly 2.moderatly 3.slightly 4.slignhly 5.moaeratty 6.strongydisagree disagree disagree agree agreeagree3. When I see someone else doing something well, / becomecritical of my own activities and accomplishments.l.strorigly 2.moderatlv 3.slightly 4.sliglitIy 5.moaeratiyG.stronglydisagree disagree disagree agree agreeagree634. I tend to spoil my good feelings about myself by thinkingof, or looking for, something negative within me.I .strongly 2.moderaty 3.siigritiy 4.siigntiy 5.moderauy 6.strongydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree5. I often turn negative feedback from others into constructivecourses of action without getting too hard on myself.I .strongiy 2.moderatly 3.sligntly 4.siignuy 5.moderatiy 6.stronglydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree6. Somehow I have a tendency to come to a criticalconclusion about myself too easily.I .strongiy 2.moderatly 3.siigntiy 4.slightty S.moderatly 6.strongiydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree7. When things go wrong, I tend to criticize myself quitereadily before assessing the situation objectively.l.strongly 2.moderatly 3.siigntiy 4.slightiy 5.moderatly 6.stronglydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree8. I sometimes find myself thinking of negative things aboutmyself for no reason.I .strongty 2.moderatly 3.slightly 4.slightly 5.moderatly 6.strongiydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree9. Once I detect a weakness in me, or notice a mistake Ihave made, it is hard to stop thinking negative things aboutmyself.1 .strorlgly 2.moderatly 3.slightly 4.slightly S.moderatly 6.strongiyIsagree disagree disagree agree agree agree6410. When I experience a faHure or a criticism, I can generallykeep from being carried away with critical thoughts aboutmyself.I .strongiy 2.moderatly 3.slightly 4.slightly 5.moderatly 6.stronglydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree11. I tend to appreciate my weaknesses and inabifities withoutbecoming overly critical of myself.I .strongiy 2.moaeratiy 3.siigntiy 4.signy 5.moderatly 6.strongtydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree12. I tend to focus on the positive aspects of myself morereadily than on the negative aspects.I .strongly 2.moaeratly 3.siigntly 4.slightly 5.moderatly 6.stronglydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree13. I tend to get carried away with my weaknesses and forgetto appreciate my strengths when I think seriously aboutmyself.I .strorlgly 2.moaeratty 3.slightly 4.slightly 5.moderatly 6.strongydisagree disagree disagree agree agree agree65SELF-VALIDATIONANDPSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENTOFGAY MENCOOPERSMITH SELF-ESTEEM INVENTORIES______1. Things usually don’t bother me.like me unlike me2. I find it very hard to talk in front of a group.like me unlike me3. There are lots of things about myself I’dlike me unlike me change if I could.4. I can make up my mind without too muchlike me unlike me trouble.5. I’m a lot of fun to be with.like me unlike me6. I get upset easily at home.like me unlike me______7. It takes me a long time to get used tolike me unlike me anything new.8. I’m popular with persons my own age.like me unlike me9. My family usually considers my feelings.like me unlike me10. I give in very easily.:ke me unlike me11. My family expects to much of me.ke me unlike me66___12. It’s pretty tough to be me.like me unlike me___13. Things are all mixed up in my life.like me unlike me14. People usually follow my ideas.like me unlike me15. I have a Jaw opinion of myself.like me unlike me16. There are many times when I would like tolike me unlike me leave home.__17. I often feel upset with my work.like me unlike me_18. I’m not as nice looking as most people.like me unlike me___19. If I have something to say, I usually say it.like me unlike me20. My family understands me.like me unlike me21. Most people are better liked than I am.like me unlike me-—22. I usually feel as if my family is pushing me.like me unlike me23. I often get discouraged with what I amlike me unlike me doing._24. 1 often wish I were someone else.like me unlike me25. I can’t be depended on.like me unlike me67Appendix C. Reference list of articles and work sheets handed outduring workshopCain, Roy. (1991). Stigma management and gay identity development.Social Work, 36(1), 67—73.Ishiyama, I. (1989). Understanding foreign adolescenttsdifficulties incross-cultural adjustment: A Self-Validation Model. CanadianJournal of School Psychology, 5, 41-56.[shiyama, I. (1987). On self-validation. Heartwood: A Journal ofExperience, Expression, and Odyssey, 5(4), 7,16-18.Struzzo, J. A. (1989). Pastoral counselling and homosexuality. Journalof Homosexuality, 18(1—2), 195—22368“THE MAN IN THE Giss”When you get what you want in your struggle for self,And the world makes you king for a day:Then go to the mirror and look at yourselfAnd see what that guy has to say.For it isn’t your father, or mother or wifeWhose judgement upon you must pass;The fellow whose verdict counts most in your lifeIs the guy staring back from the glass.He’s the fellow to please, never mind all the rest.For he’s with you clear up to the end;And vouve passed your most dangerous, difficult testIf the guy in the glass is your friend.You may be iike Jack Homer and chisel a plum,And think you’re a wonderful guy;But the man in the glass says you’re only a bumIf you can’t look him straight in the eye.You can fool the whole world down the pathway of years,And get pats on the back as you pass;But your final reward will be heartaches and tearsIf you’ve cheated the guy in the glass.—AnonymousSelf Esteem Fact Sheet69Definition of Self Esteem: The extent to whicha person believes himself or herself worthy,capable, significant, and successful (Stanley Coopersmith).2. CharacteristIcs of People with High SelfEsteem:a. They are less anxious and depressed than arepeople with low self esteem.b. They tend to be better students than do peoplewith low self esteem.c. They have better physicai heaftñ than do people with low self esteem.d. They enjoy better social relationships than do people with low self esteem.e. They perform better at their jobs than do people with low self esteem.f. They value independence.g. They welcome competition.h. They expect success.I. They appear to be adjusted, happy, and content.3. Five Basic Attitudes Essential to High Self Esteem:a. A sense of security (well-defined limits, sense of trust).b. A sense of identity (obtained through receiving positive feedback, recognition, loveand acceptance, encouragement to rely on sell evaluation to assess one’s ownstrengths and weaknesses).c. A sense of belonging (social acceptance).d. A sense of purpose (setting realistic goals for oneself).e. A sense of personal competence (ability to cope with problems andto meet goals).4. Elements to be Considered in the Development of Self Esteem:a. Parental acceptance of the child (If our parents were unaccepting of us, we needto learn to accept ourselves).b. Clearly defined limits (the ability to tell where your roles and responsibilities endand those of someone else begin).c. Respectful treaJnent (learning to expect respect from others and totreat otherswith respect).5. Research Has Found:a. Sell esteem measures more accurately predict academic and job performancethan do intelligence. In children they are more predictive of readinessto read thanare IC scores.b. Self esteem is an accurate predictor of creativity andproductivity in general.c. Sell esteem is judged to be a primary tactor in employee ability, and its importanceis equal to (if not greater than) the importance to skill or ability.70Hardy PersonalityScientists have identified Thardiness’ as a personality characteristic that enables certain people toremain healthy despite major life changes and high levels of stress in their lives. Hardy personality is similar to highself esteem in many ways.There are three components to hardiness: Commitment, Challenge, and Control.Commitment: Hardy people have the ability to recognize and appreciate their unique values, goals, andpriorities and to develop plans to attain them in spite of changes in their life situations.Even in the presence of high levels of stress, the committed person remains healthybecause of his or her sense of purpose, as opposed to the alienated person who feelsapathetic and powerless when confronted with stressful life events, and thus vulnerable tothe development of disease.Challenge: Hardy people see change as the normal life situation rather than stability. They viewchange as an opportunity for personal growth through the challenge of adapting to a newsituation.Control: Hardy people see themselves as ‘movers and shakers, rather than victims of life.With their internal sense of control and motivation, they see themselves as havingmore power arid control in their lives than others with an external sense of control.They believe that, through their individual actions they can modify stressors intomanageable, growth-producing opportunities.The Hardy Person Is:a. Uncontrolled by others, yet socially responsible.b. Sensitive to his or her own needs, yet self disciplined.c. Aware of life’s difficulties, yet courageous.d. Individualistic, yet capable of intimacy.71Self Esteem WorksheetTHINGS I LiKE ABOUT MYSELF:__________________________________________________________ONE ThiNG I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGENOW:ThINGS I WOULD UKE TO CHANGEWHY I WANT TO CHANGE ThIS:72HOW I WANT IT TO BE DIFFERENT:STEPS I WILL TAKE IN THE COMING WEEKTO BEGIN 11IIS CHANGE:73r 0UI S U P P0 ‘r tiE I’ WC)IK I1. ROLE MODELS(PEOPLE ALIVE OR DEAD KOM YOUADMIRE)You2. PEER GROUP(PEOPLE ‘EO LIKE TEE SAMELIFESTYLE)3. FOUL-WEAThER FRIENDS(WHEN DISASTER STRIKES, WHOM CANYOU CALL UPON?)5. COMPETENCE MODELS(PEOPLE YOU KNOW AND RESPECTPERSONALLY OR PROFESSIONALLY)6. CHALLENGERS(PEOPLE WHO KAY DISAGREE WITH YOUBUT WHO STIMULATE YOU TO GROW ANDCHANGE)4. HEALTH RESOURCES IPROFESSIONAL SUPPORT SYSTEMS(PEOPLE OR PLACES YOU CAN TRUST,FOR EXAMPLE, COUNSELLING SERVICE,YOU DOCTOR, Ed.)7. CLOSE FRIENDS(PEOPLE WITH WHOM YOU ARECOMFORTABLE DISCUSSING SENSITIVEISSUES)IT ••rt CD I-,.CD CD0 0 z G)75Appendix D. Outline of workshop (sessions 1 through 10)Session 1:- Introductions- An orientation to the study was given- Issues of confidentiality and group norms were discussed- Questions- Introduce pre-test package- Administer pre-test packageSession 2:- Each subject gave a brief introduction about himself- General discussion: “How do you define yourself, who and whatactivities help you validate the sense of who you are, and whichgroups and communities do you feel part of and why?”- Introduce Validationgram: “What relationships, things,activities, and places validate their identity”(See Appendix C)Readings:Ishiyama, I. (1989). Understanding foreign adolescent’sdifficulties in cross-cultural adjustment: A Self-ValidationModel. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 5, 41-56.Ishiyama, I. (1987). On self—validation. Heartwood: A Journal ofExperience, Expression, and Odyssey, 5(4), 7,16-18.76Session 3:- Described contents of wallets and bags in relation to identity- Who are you exercise: Sub.jects paired off and took turnsinterviewing each other asking who are you over and over again- Regrouped and each partner talked about the otherReadings:Cain, Roy. (1991). Stigma management and gay identity development.Social Work, 36(1), 67—73.Session 4- General discussion: “What and who give you meaning in life, asense of fulfilment, and the opportunities to experience loveand caring for self and others, and what would make your lifemore meaningful and fulfilling?”Readings:Struzzo, J. A. (1989). Pastoral counselling and homosexuality.Journal of Homosexuality, 18(1-2), 195—223Session 5:- Continued discussion on Love, Fulfilment, and Meaning in Life- Discussed strategies for integrating spiritual identity withhomosexual identity: Is this possible?- Reframed homosexuality as fulfilling and meaningful77Session 6:— General discussion: “How do you make yourself feel secure,supported, and at home, and who and what kind of activitiescontribute to generating such feelings in you?”- Your Support Network work-sheet (Appendix C)- Discussed gaps in support networks and how to fill them- Introduced concept of alternative familiesSession 7:- General discussion: “In which activities and aspects of life doyou feel competent and autonomous and who helps you appreciatethe competent and autonomous self?”- Assertiveness exercise: Subjects broke into pairs and roleplayed specific personally relevant assertiveness issuesSession 8:- General discussion: “In what ways do you value yourself highly,and what activities and which persons help you to experience asense of unconditional self-worth and self-acceptance?”Session 9:- Discussed Self-Esteem fact sheet and Hardy Personality(See Appendix C)- Read and discussed “The Man In The Glass” (See Appendix C)- Self-Esteem Work-sheet (See Appendix C)Session 10:- Unfinished business- Reflections on overall group experience- Each participant talked about their feelings about the groupending and where they would go from here- Post-test package administered7879Appendix E. Nungesser Homosexual Attitudes Inventory SubscalesSubscale I: Attitudes toward the fact of one’s own homosexuality1. When I am in a conversation with a homosexual man and he touchesme, it does not make me uncomfortable.3. Whenever I think a lot about being a homosexual, I feel depressed.6. I am glad to be gay.8. When I am sexually attracted to a close male friend, I feeluncomfortable.9. I am proud to be a part of the gay community.12. My homosexuality does not make me unhappy.20. Whenever I think a lot about being a homosexual, I feel criticalabout myself.29. I wish I were a heterosexual.31. I do not think I will be able to have a long term loverelationship with another man.32. I am confident that my homosexuality does not make me inferior.Subscale II: Attitudes toward homosexuality in general and toward othermale homosexuals4. Homosexuality is not as good as heterosexuality.7. Male homosexuality is a natural expression of sexuality in humanmales.10. Male homosexuals do not dislike women any more than heterosexualmales dislike women.8011. Marriage between two homosexuals should be legalized.13. Male homosexuals are overly promiscuous.15. Most problems that homosexuals have, have come from their statusas an oppressed minority, not from their homosexuality per Se.17. Homosexual lifestyles are not as fulfilling as heterosexuallifestyles.21. Choosing an adult gay lifestyle should be an option for children.24. Homosexuality is a sexual perversion.27. Adult homosexual males who have sex with boys under 18 years ofage should be punished by law.Subscale III: Attitudes toward the fact of one’s homosexuality beingknown by others.2. I would not mind if my boss found out that I am gay.5. When I tell my friends about my homosexuality, I do not worry thatthey will try to remember things about me that would make meappear to fit the stereotype of a homosexual.14. When I am sexually attracted to another gay man, I do not mind ifsomeone else knows how I feel.16. When women know of my homosexuality, I am afraid they will notrelate to me as a man.18. I would not mind if my neighbours knew that I am gay.19. It is important for me to conceal the fact that I am gay from mostpeople.22. If my straight friends knew of my homosexuality, I would beuncomfortable.8123. If men knew of my homosexuality, I am afraid they would begin toavoid me.25. If it were made public that I am a homosexual, I would beextremely unhappy.26. If my peers knew of my homosexuality, I am afraid that many wouldnot want to be my friends.28. If others knew of my homosexuality, I would not be afraid thatthey would see me as being effeminate.30. When I think about coming out to a peer I am afraid they will paymore attention to my body movements and voice inflections.33. I am afraid that people will harass me if I come out morepublicly.34. When I think about coming out to a heterosexual male friend, I donot worry that he might watch me to see if I do things that arestereotypically homosexual.82Appendix F. Self-Critical Cognition SubscalesFactor 1: Negative self-processing2. I tend to blow my weaknesses, limitations, and mistakes out ofproportion in my thinking.3. When I see someone else doing something well, I become critical ofmy own activities and accomplishments.4. I tend to spoil my good feelings about myself by thinking of, orlooking for, something negative within me.6. Somehow I have a tendency to come to a critical conclusion aboutmyself too easily.7. When things go wrong, I tend to criticize myself quite readilybefore assessing the situation objectively.8. I sometimes find myself thinking of negative things about myselffor no reason.9. Once I detect a weakness in me, or notice a mistake I have made,it is hard to stop thinking negative things about myself.13. I tend to get carried away with my weaknesses and forget toappreciate my strengths when I think seriously abut myself.83Factor 2: Failure in Positive Self—Processing1. I’m good at looking at myself critically while still remainingpositive to myself.5. I often turn negative feedback from others into constructivecourses of action without getting too hard on myself.10. When I experience a failure or a criticism, I can generally keepfrom being carried away with critical thoughts about myself.11. I tend to appreciate my weaknesses and inabilities withoutbecoming overly critical of myself.12. I tend to focus on the positive aspects of myself more readilythan on the negative aspects.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054040/manifest

Comment

Related Items