(PS7-B35) The Protective Role of Resilience in Promoting Mental Health of Sexual and Gender Minorities

Background: The Minority Stress Model posits that sexual and gender minorities (SGM) disproportionately experience discrimination and associated mental health problems due to their minority identity. It is important to identify promotive and protective factors against minority stress and consequential mental health problems. Resilience, one’s ability to cope with stressors and capacity to manage psychological problems while experiencing difficult situations, has been shown to be negatively associated with depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Additionally, cross-sectional data suggests resilience weakens the association between SGM minority-stress and depression and suicidal ideation. Extant literature cannot, however, make causational claims about the relationship between resilience and various mental health outcomes due to its cross-sectional nature; longitudinal data is necessary to determine directional effects. Toward that aim, the present study aimed to examine if resilience prospectively predicts mental health outcomes in the following 6 months.

Methods: Data were drawn from FAB400, a longitudinal cohort study of SGM-AFAB adolescents and young adults. Participants who were administered all measures at two time points, which were six months apart, were included in the current study (N = 456). Participants completed measures of resilience and various mental health-related outcomes, including depression, anxiety, suicidality, and substance use (alcohol and cannabis).

Results: To test whether resilience predicted mental health outcomes, the current study used residualized regression analyses. Specifically, each Time 2 mental health outcome was regressed first onto the corresponding Time 1 mental health outcome and then onto Time 1 resilience. Controlling for Time 1 levels of the given mental health variable, results indicated that Time 1 resilience was predictive of Time 2 depression levels (β = -.145, p = < .001), Time 2 anxiety levels (β = -.104, p =.01), and Time 2 suicidal ideation (β = -.142, p =.003). However, Time 1 resilience was not predictive of Time 2 alcohol use (β = .035, p = .31) or Time 2 cannabis use (β = .01, p = .761).

Discussion: The present findings build upon previous cross-sectional research, providing stronger evidence for a directional effect of resilience on depression, anxiety, and suicidality. It is unclear why resilience did not predict change in substance use; perhaps substance use is an alternate coping mechanism that is less affected by resilience. These findings build support for resilience as a protective factor for SGM mental health. Thus, interventions aimed at increasing resilience may, in turn, improve mental health and help reduce SGM mental health disparities.