1 - (SYM 131) Explicating the Direct and Indirect Effects of Distal and Proximal Minority Stressors and Physical Violence Perpetration Among Same-gender and Different-gender Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Couples

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals display similar intimate partner violence (IPV) prevalence rates as heterosexual individuals (Langenderfer-Magruder et al., 2016). Prior research posits minority stressors (e.g., internalized stigma) may be relevant in distinguishing LGB and heterosexual IPV (Balsam & Szymanski, 2005), however relationship-specific minority stress, like relationship stigma, has yet to be examined. Moreover, there is a need to explore potential mechanisms that may explain these associations, such as conflict communication. This study investigated how distal (e.g., history of violence or discrimination) and proximal (i.e., internalized and relationship stigma) minority stressors are associated with IPV perpetration. Communication was also explored as a mediator between relationship stigma and IPV perpetration. 

            In total, 117 (N=234) LGB couples in a committed relationship for at least six months completed self-report measures. Data come from a national sample of male- (59.8%, n=140) and female-identifying (40.2%, n=94) individuals, with 38% identifying as gay, 21% as lesbian, and 36% as bisexual. Individuals were primarily White (90.5%, n=212), married (61.0%, n=155), and in their early forties (M=43.27, SD=15.75).  

Separate actor-partner interdependence mediation models based on gender (man-man, MM; woman-woman, WW; and different-gender, MW) were conducted. For MM couples, distal stressors were directly related to IPV perpetration and indirectly related through internalized (actor-actor_indirect = 0.146, p< .001; partner-actor_indirect=0.075, p< .001) and relationship (actor-actor_indirect=0.284, p< .001) stigma, whereas only direct effects were significant for WW couples (actor_direct=0.308, p< .001; partner_direct=0.231, p< .001). For MW couples, distal stressors were not directly related to perpetration, but were indirectly associated through internalized (total_indirect=0.344, p< .001, actor-partner_indirect=0.323, p< .001) and relationship (actor-actor_indirect= 0.213, p< .001; actor-partner_indirect=0.100, p< .001) stigma. For MM and WW couples, there was evidence of direct effects of relationship stigma and indirect effects of conflict communication, whereas MW couples again evidenced only indirect effects.


Findings underscore the value of considering sexual and gender identity in relation to IPV perpetration. Results also highlight the importance of relationship stigma and conflict communication in understanding risk factors of IPV perpetration for LGB couples.