Uncategorized

Julia Leschi

Research has repeatedly found that members of oppressed social groups (e.g., sexual or racial/ethnic minorities) have worse mental health outcomes than their dominant counterparts (Dhejne et al., 2016; Hendricks & Testa, 2012; Meyer, 2003; Paradies et al., 2015; Pieterse et al., 2012; Williams & WilliamsMorris, 2000). For example, African American adults are 20% more likely to report high levels of psychological distress than White adults, while Latina teenagers are more likely to attempt suicide than their non-Hispanic White counterparts (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2019). Similarly, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) adults are three times more likely to report suicidal ideation than heterosexual adults (CDC, 2016), with 40% of transgender adults having attempted suicide in their lifetime, compared to 5% of the general population (James et al., 2016). Minority stress theory has been applied to explain these differences, positing that stigma, prejudice, and discrimination directed at minority groups create a hostile and stressful environment which leads to mental health problems (Meyer, 2003). Minority stress includes distal stressors (e.g., workplace and housing discrimination, microaggressions), objective events that are visible in the environment to an outside observer, and proximal stressors (e.g., self-stigma, identity concealment, expectation of rejection), which arise secondary to distal ones and have been defined as the internalization of negative messaging and attitudes projected by others (Hendricks & Testa, 2012; Meyer, 2003; Ramirez & Paz Galupo, 2019). Although the literature on minority stress has mostly focused on LGBTQ, as well as ethnic and racial minority (i.e., people of color) , individuals (Paradies et al., 2015; Pieterse et al., 2012), it has typically explored the relation between a single minority identity and poor mental health outcomes. Less attention has been given to how minority stress affects LGBTQ individuals who also belong to racial/ethnic minority groups. Some have hypothesized that the intersection of these two identities amplifies the risks of exposure to discrimination leading to minority stress and, therefore, alters the processes through which one is affected by it; however, others suggest this intersection might lead to resilience as a result of LGBTQ people of color’s prior experiences with discrimination (Ching et al., 2018; Ramirez & Paz Galupo, 2019; Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2019; Rosenfield, 2012). Hence, the present literature review explored the following question: How does minority stress impact the mental health of LGBTQ people of color?

Excess Risks and Mental Health Outcomes

Having multiple minority identities exposes LGBTQ people of color to both racist and heterosexist microaggressions, leaving them susceptible to excess minority stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Szymanski & Sung, 2010). This specific vulnerability has been termed the “double-jeopardy” hypothesis, which posits that the intersection of two marginalized identities leads to a double health disadvantage (Dowd & Bengston, 1978). Research studying LGBTQ people of color has found that they suffer from negative mental health outcomes such as general psychological distress, increased anxiety, and depressed mood at a higher rate than their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts (Diaz et al., 2001; Szymanski & Sung, 2010). Such outcomes are seen as a consequence of social discrimination, unique tensions between their sexual/gender identity, and the perceived heterosexist and cissexist norms of their ethnic or racial community (Consolacion et al., 2004; Diaz et al., 2001; Szymanski & Sung, 2010). Indeed, minority stress factors can be perceived differently based on one’s own cultural beliefs and the messaging from one’s environment (Ramirez & Paz Galupo, 2019; Sarno et al., 2015). Presently, LGBTQ people of color report being discriminated against in both of their communities, having to deal with heterosexism, homophobia, or transphobia within their racial/ethnic groups, while dealing with racism and fetishization in LGBTQ spaces (i.e., social and political spaces catering specifically to an LGBTQ population; Balsam et al., 2011; Consolacion et al., 2004; McConnell et al., 2018; Ramirez & Paz, 2019; Szymanski & Sung, 2010). LGBTQ spaces give queer individuals the opportunity to be true to themselves, as well as find support and community; however, when LGBTQ people of color experience racism in these spaces, they are isolated from a source of support more accessible to White LGBTQ people (Gieseking, 2016).

Additionally, queer people of color face community specific struggles in their home environments, such as clashes between traditional cultural norms and queer identity (Balsam et al., 2011; Ching et al., 2018; Noyola et al., 2020). These situations can trigger a conflict in allegiance, which has been defined as a perceived incompatibility between one’s racial and ethnic and sexual orientation identities, and leads to psychological distress (Sarno et al., 2015). Specifically, conflicts in allegiances are positively correlated with experiences of racism in LGBTQ spaces and heterosexism from family (Sarno et al., 2015), highlighting the negative effects of this double-sided rejection. Moreover, conflict in allegiance levels are highest among those with high racial/ethnic behavioral engagement and low sexual orientation behavioral engagement, leaving them more likely to suffer from poor mental health (Sarno et al., 2015). This suggests that strong identification and engagement with the LGBTQ community could mediate the extent to which distress caused by conflicts in allegiances develop (Ching et al., 2018; Sarno et al., 2015). 24 Gender, Sexuality, & Inequality • 25 These findings, in keeping with minority stress theory, confirm that alienation from one’s community because of identity factors is harmful to mental health, leading to greater psychological distress and internalized stigma (Meyer, 2003; Sarno et al., 2015; Szymanski & Sung, 2010). They also emphasize the importance of LGBTQ people of color having access to welcoming LGBTQ spaces to reduce the effects of this double-minority stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Cyrus, 2017). However, LGBTQ people of color often face a dearth of resources catering to the particular needs resulting from their intersecting identities, or are faced with barriers to access, leaving them further vulnerable to the effects of minority stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Cyrus, 2017; McConnell et al., 2018; Ramirez & Paz, 2019).

Resilience

Despite their increased exposure to discrimination, LGBTQ people of color do not consistently present with more compromised mental health than their White counterparts, challenging the double-jeopardy hypothesis (Rosenfield, 2012). In addition, Black LGBTQ adults have repeatedly been found to have a lower prevalence of mental health disorders than the rest of the LGBTQ population, despite their higher exposure to discrimination and adversity, suggesting higher resilience (i.e., ability to address adversity; Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2019; Rosenfield, 2012). The resilience hypothesis posits that individuals who experience racism from a young age are better prepared to deal with later heterosexist microaggressions, partly because of the benefits derived from community-based resilience (i.e., community resources and connectedness; Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2019; Rosenfield, 2012). The apparent protective effects of racial/ethnic minority belonging against poor mental health for LGBTQ individuals further challenge the double-jeopardy hypothesis and the perception of minority stress as being additive, showing instead that the experience of discrimination in one aspect of life can mitigate the outcomes of further discrimination (McConnell et al., 2018, Rosenfield, 2012).

Similarly, strong identification with the LGBTQ community reduces the effects of minority stress and leads to better mental health outcomes in LGBTQ individuals, irrespective of race/ethnicity (McConnell et al., 2018; Sarno et al., 2015). However, LGBTQ people of color report seeking out primarily intersectional community spaces, which are more attuned to the needs of multiple minority individuals and facilitate identification to a queer community of color (McConnell et al., 2018; Sarno et al., 2015). Interestingly, research has found antiLGBTQ stigma less damaging to people of color’s identification with the LGBTQ community than to that of White LGBTQ individuals (Ramirez & Paz Galupo, 2019 ; Sarno et al, 2015). These findings suggest that anti-LGBTQ stigma leads to greater rejection of LGBTQ affiliation in White people than in people of color, which could be explained by previous reports that people of color have stronger community and familial orientations than White people (Gaines et al., 1997; McConnell et al., 2018). This hints at another process through which double-minority status surprisingly protects LGBTQ people of color’s mental health (Consolacion et al., 2004; Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2019), challenging the double-jeopardy and minority stress hypothesis. Conclusion

LGBTQ people of color are surprisingly resilient to the effects of minority stress due to heterosexism (Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2019; Rosenfield, 2012). Yet, their multiple minority identities put them at higher risk of exposure to discrimination and adverse events, placing a strain on their capacity to bounce back from these societal attacks (Meyer, 2003; Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2019). The resources that LGBTQ people of color typically use to develop their resilience are different than those used by the White LGBTQ community (Balsam et al., 2011, Szymanski & Sung, 2010). LGBTQ people of color do find solace in spaces centered around an intersectional experience (McConnell et al., 2018), but these are less prevalent and less funded, leaving LGBTQ people of color more vulnerable to isolation, at the expense of their mental health (Balsam et al., 2011, Szymanski & Sung, 2010). This discrepancy within the LGBTQ community needs to be addressed in order to help LGBTQ people of color better mobilize their resilience. The findings from this literature review also indicate that it is important to continue to research minority stress theory as more than an additive process, but one that is mediated and can be buffered by a series of individual characteristics and mental processes. More research needs to be done on how these specificities interact with minority stress to gain a better understanding of risk and resilience factors.

Many of the studies in this review recruited participants with LGBTQ labels; however, some individuals prefer terms like “men having sex with men,” “sexually diverse,” or “fluid” (Ramirez & Paz Galupo, 2019). Hence, a portion of the LGBTQ community may have been missed. Future studies should try to use different recruitment methods in order to capture a greater part of the population. Moreover, too few studies focus on a unique racial/ethnic minority group, and instead study people of color as a homogeneous group. This could lead to missing the intricacies of each group’s experience and result in unrepresentative results. The particularities of each ethnic/racial group’s experience of discrimination need to be explored in further depth in order to better address the mental health needs of people of color within the LGBTQ community. To address this gap in the research, future studies should be qualitative in nature, as they are better suited to focus on the unique cultural factors affecting the various racial/ethnic groups in the LGBTQ community. Thus, in order to reduce the risks of negative mental health outcomes due to conflicts in allegiance and minority stress, this review highlights the need to develop and fund more community spaces aimed at LGBTQ people of color, and further combat racism in White LGBTQ spaces and homophobia and transphobia in the home communities of people of color.

References

Balsam, K. F., Molina, Y., Beadnell, B., Simoni, J., & Walters, K. (2011). Measuring multiple minority stress: The LGBT People of Color Microaggressions Scale. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17, 163–174.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Sexual identity, sex of sexual contacts, and health-risk behaviors among students in grades 9-12: Youth risk behavior surveillance. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/ss/ pdfs/ss6509.pdf

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019). Summary health statistics: National health interview survey: 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/shs/tables.htm.

Ching, T. H. W., Lee, S. Y., Chen, J., So, R. P., & Williams, M. T. (2018). A model of intersectional stress and trauma in Asian American sexual and gender minorities. Psychology of Violence, 8(6), 657–668.

Consolacion, T. B., Russell, S. T., & Sue, S. (2004). Sex, race/ ethnicity, and romantic attractions: Multiple minority status adolescents and mental health. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10(3), 200-214.

Cyrus, K. (2017). Multiple minorities as multiply marginalized: Applying the minority stress theory to LGBTQ people of color. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 21(3), 194–202.

Dhejne, C., Van Vlerken, R., Heylens, G., & Arcelus, J. (2016). Mental health and gender dysphoria: A review of the literature. International Review of Psychiatry, 28(1), 44-57

Diaz, R. M., Ayala, G., Bein, E., Henne, J., & Marin, B. V. (2001). The impact of homophobia, poverty, and racism on the mental health of gay and bisexual Latino men: Findings from 3 US cities. American Journal of Public Health, 91(6), 927-932.

Dowd, J. J, & Bengtson, V. L. (1978). Aging in minority populations an examination of the double jeopardy hypothesis. Journal of Gerontology, 33(3), 427-436,

Gaines, S. O. Jr, Marelich, W. D., Bledsoe, K. L., Steers, W. N., Herderson, M. C., Granrose, C. S., Barájas, L., Hicks, D., Lyde, M., Takahashi, Y., Yum, N., Ríos, D. I., García, B. F., Farris, K. R., & Page, M. S. (1997). Links between race/ ethnicity and cultural values as mediated by racial/ethnic identity and moderated by gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1460–1476.

Ghabrial, M. A. (2017). “Trying to figure out where we belong”: Narratives of racialized sexual minorities on community, identity, discrimination, and health. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 14(1), 42-55.

Gieseking, J. J. (2016). LGBTQ spaces and places. In M. E. Springdale (Ed.), LGBTQ America: A Theme study of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer history (pp. 1-31) National Park Foundation. Washington D.C.

Hendricks, M. L., & Testa, R. J. (2012). A conceptual framework for clinical work with transgender and gender nonconforming clients: An adaptation of the Minority Stress Model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 43(5), 460-467.

James, S. E., Herman, J. L., Rankin, S., Keisling, M., Mottet, L., & Ana, M. (2016). The Report of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality.

Kennedy, B. R., Mathis, C. C., & Woods, A. K. (2007). African Americans and their distrust of the health care system: Healthcare for diverse populations. Journal of Cultural Diversity, 14(2), 56-60.

Livingston, N. A., Flentje, A., Brennan, J., Mereish, E. H., Reed, O., & Cochran, B. N. (2020). Real-time associations between discrimination and anxious and depressed mood among sexual and gender minorities: The moderating effects of lifetime victimization and identity concealment. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 7(2), 132-141.

McConnell, E. A., Janulis, P., Phillips, G., 2nd, Truong, R., & Birkett, M. (2018). Multiple minority stress and LGBT community resilience among sexual minority men. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 5(1), 1–12.

Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674- 697.

Meyer, I. H. (2015). Resilience in the study of minority stress and health of sexual and gender minorities. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2(3), 209–212.

Murphy, J., & Hardaway, R. (2017). LGBTQ adolescents of color: Considerations for working with youth and their families. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 21(3), 221-227.

Noyola, N., Sánchez, M., & Cardemil, E. V. (2020). Minority stress and coping among sexual diverse Latinxs. Journal of Latinx Psychology, 8(1), 58-82. Paradies, Y., Ben, J., Denson, N., Elias, A., Priest, N., Pieterse, A., Gupta, A., Kelaher, M., & Gee, G. (2015). Racism as a determinant of health: A systematic review and metaanalysis. PloS ONE, 10(9), 1-48.

Pieterse, A. L., Todd, N. R., Neville, H. A., & Carter, R. T. (2012). Perceived racism and mental health among Black American adults: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59(1), 1-9.

Ramirez, J. L., & Paz Galupo, M. (2019). Multiple minority stress: The role of proximal and distal stress on mental health outcomes among lesbian, gay, and bisexual people of color. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 23(2), 145-167. 

Rodriguez-Seijas, C., Eaton, N. R., & Pachankis, J. E. (2019). Prevalence of psychiatric disorders at the intersection of race and sexual orientation: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related ConditionsIII. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 87(4), 321-331. 10.1037/ccp0000377

Rosenfield, S. (2012). Triple jeopardy? Mental health at the intersection of gender, race, and class. Social Science and Medicine, 74(11), 1791-1801.

Sarno, E. L., Mohr, J. J., Jackson, S. D., & Fassinger, R. E. (2015). When identities collide: Conflicts in allegiances among LGB people of color. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(4), 550-559.

Stults, C. B., Kupprat, S. A., Krause, K. D., Kapadia, F., & Halkitis, P. N. (2017). Perceptions of safety among LGBTQ people following the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 4(3), 251-256. 10.1037/sgd0000240

Szymanski, D. M., & Sung, M. R. (2010). Minority stress and psychological distress among Asian American sexual minority persons. The Counseling Psychologist, 38, 848– 872.

Williams, D. R., & Williams-Morris, R. (2000). Racism and mental health: The African American experience. Ethnicity & Health, 5(3-4), 243-268

Olivia Russo

The transgender (i.e., gender identities that do not align with sex assigned at birth) and gender non-conforming (i.e., gender identities existing outside the binary categories of male and female) community (TGNC) is particularly vulnerable to psychiatric problems and disparities in mental health (Brennan et al., 2017; Chozden et al., 2019; Lloyd et al., 2019; Price-Feeney et al., 2020). TGNC individuals are 1.5 to 2 times more likely to experience symptoms of anxiety and depression than nongender minorities (Livingston et al., 2020). Furthermore, relative to cisgender individuals, TGNC individuals are at an increased risk of contemplating and attempting suicide; specifically, as compared to 5% of their cisgender counterparts, 40% of TGNC individuals will have attempted suicide at some point in their lifetime (McDowell et al., 2020; Price-Feeney et al., 2020). Research suggests that discrimination is a key factor that drives these mental health disparities (Gleason et al., 2016; Puckett et al., 2020). TGNC individuals disproportionately experience gender-based discrimination (i.e., prejudice, rejection, and violence based on identity or expression) due to their gender minority status, which may result in elevated levels of anxiety and depression (Brennan et al., 2017; Chodzen et al., 2019; Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019; Williams & Mann, 2017). Gender-based discrimination exists in two notable forms: daily gender-based discrimination (i.e., everyday occurances of gender-based discrimination) and structural gender-based discrimination (i.e., discrimination in public realms due to lack of protection under policies; Glick et al., 2019; Livingston et al., 2020; Testa et al., 2017; Williams & Mann, 2017). The mechanism through which discrimination affects anxiety and depression is important to investigate, as interventions targeting this mechanism could be the most effective in alleviating anxious and depressed feelings in TGNC individuals. Thus, this review aimed to answer the following question: How does gender-based discrimination impact levels of anxious and depressed moods in TGNC individuals?

Daily Discrimination

Daily gender-based discrimination affects the TGNC community disporportionately through minority stress (i.e., discrimination based on the marginalized social status and systemic oppression of gender minority people; Brennan et al., 2017; Price-Feeney et al., 2020; Puckett et al, 2020). Minority stress exists in two forms: distal stress and proximal stress (Chozden et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2017). Distal stress, or overt gender-based discrimination, includes non-gender affirming external experiences and events, rejection due to gender, and verbal or physical attacks based on gender identity (e.g., harassment, violent assault, microaggressions, social rejection, and sexual and physical violence; Brennan et al., 2017; Lloyd et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2017). Explicit and direct gender-based discrimination is categorized as victimization, which cumulatively can lead to TGNC individuals becoming hypervigilent about future minority stress experiences (Livingston et al., 2020). Hypervigilence to minority stress experiences causes TGNC individuals to be more aware of the plethora of discrimination they experience, which, in turn, furthers sensitivity to these experiences, creating a cyclical relation between stress experiences and sensitivity.

The relation between distal stress and anxious and depressed moods is mediated by proximal stress, or the internalization of psychological processes based on experiences and societal messages about norms (Lloyd et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2017). In other words, when TGNC individuals are exposed to overt forms of discrimination and subtle messages about valid gender expression (i.e., distal stress), they often internalize these experiences in an attempt to process them (i.e., proximal stress; Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019; Puckett et al., 2020; Testa et al., 2017). This process of internalizing negative experiences might subsequently lead to internalized homophobia/transphobia and internalized stress (Chodzen et al., 2019; Gleason et al., 2016; Lloyd et al., 2019). Research has found that internalized homophobia/transphobia is most damaging to TGNC individuals’ mental health (Lloyd et al., 2019). This internalization is associated with a need to conceal identity and negative self-worth, both of which further psychological distress, and, in turn, exacerbate anxious and depressed moods (Brennan et al., 2017; Livingston et al., 2020; Price-Feeney et al., 2020; Puckett et al., 2020; Testa et al., 2017).

Structural Discrimination

The experiences and effects of daily discrimination are compounded by structural discrimination, further damaging TGNC individuals’ mental health. Structural gender-based discrimination (i.e., policies and laws that do not promote equal rights or address gender identity as an area of discrimination) leaves TGNC individuals lacking legal protection from discrimination (Williams & Mann, 2017). Specifically, 33 out of 50 state nondiscrimination laws do not include gender identity as a category for which to protect against discrimination (Gleason et al., 2016; Kattari et al., 2016; Williams & Mann, 2017). As a result, TGNC individuals in unprotected states experience policy-level gender discrimination, stigma, and victimization in many social domains, including, but not limited to, housing, employment, and medical care (Brennan et al., 2017; Testa et al., 20 2017; Williams & Mann, 2017).

Housing is another notable domain where TGNC individuals lack protection, evidenced by the federal Fair Housing Act (1968), which protects against housing discrimination (e.g., based on race and ability) in all states, but neglects to include gender identity as a category (Kattari et al., 2016). In turn, TGNC individuals disproportionately experience housing discrimination, as compared with their cisgender counterparts (Gleason et al., 2016; Kattari et al., 2016). Specifically, TGNC individuals experience discrimination in acquiring housing, are often denied housing due to their gender identity/expression, and/or encounter discrimination in the form of unfair or unjustified evictions (Gleason et al., 2016; Kattari et al., 2016). Unfortunately, many TGNC individuals do not acquire housing, illustrated by the fact that 19% of TGNC individuals are homeless (Kattari et al., 2016; Testa et al., 2017). Not only are TGNC individuals at a higher risk for homelessness, but they also experience further gender-based discrimination in homeless shelters, which are segreated by binary sex (i.e., male and female; Kattari et al., 2016). The compounding effects of gender-based housing discrimination result in TGNC individuals reporting increased perceptions of stigma against the TGNC community (Gleason et al., 2016). In other words, the more that TGNC individuals experience discrimination in housing, the more they believe that others hold prejudice against them.

TGNC individuals often experience both housing discrimination and elevated levels of employment discrimination as compared to their cisgender counterparts, due to their minority gender identity (Kattari et al., 2016). Specifically, research has found that 78% of TGNC individuals reported maltreatment and discrimination at work due to their gender identity/expression (Testa et al., 2017). Further, they frequently experience discriminatory hiring and firing practices based on their non-binary gender identity; specifically, in one study, 46% of TGNC individuals reported having been fired or denied a promotion (Gleason et al., 2016; Kattari et al., 2016; Testa et al., 2017). These statistics highlight the hostility that TGNC individuals experience in the workplace, not only during hiring and firing practices, but also during regular work-days. In other words, TGNC individuals identify outside the gender binary (i.e., male and female genders), thus possessing a minority identity and leaving them to be victims of gender-based discrimination. In addition to housing being a notable social domain, health and medical care exists as the most prominent social domain where TGNC individuals experience structural discrimination (Brennan et al., 2017; Testa et al., 2017; Williams & Mann, 2017). Both lived experiences of discrimination and the fear of facing discrimination act as barriers to accessing healthcare for TGNC individuals (Glick et al., 2018). Specifically, TGNC individuals report that they often delay seeking medical treatment, and that, when they do, they experience unequal treatment by healthcare professionals in the forms of verbal harassment, physical assault, and explicit treatment refusal (Glick et al., 2018; Testa et al., 2017). The extent to which TGNC individuals are protected by government policies differs by state; however, as of 2018, 30 states in the U.S. lacked state-level healthcare policies protecting TGNC communities (McDowell et al., 2020; Williams & Mann, 2017). For example, Tennessee laws allow counselors to deny service to clients based on personal principles (e.g., the belief that binary sex defines gender; Grzanka et al., 2019). This effectively legalizes discrimination against TGNC individuals and produces differences in access to treatment (Grzanka et al., 2019). Experiences of explicit victimization without legal repercussions negatively impact anxious and depressed moods (Glick et al., 2018; Testa et al., 2017; Williams & Mann, 2017). In addition to denial of treatment, the lack of cultural competency in clinicians results in TGNC individuals receiving unequal treatment, through experiencing microaggressions (i.e., intentional or unintentional derogatory messages) from clinicians, and consequently heightening the risk for anxiety in TGNC clients (Grzanka et al., 2019). Structural gender-based discrimination, most notably in health settings, results in TGNC individuals experiencing victimization in the medical field, which contributes to increased levels of anxious and depressed moods (Brennan et al., 2017; Glick et al., 2018; Testa et al., 2017; Williams & Mann, 2017).

Identity Concealment

Both structural discrimination and daily discrimination (i.e., minority stress) result in elevated levels of depression and anxiety, where discrimination’s impact on depression and anxiety is mediated by identity concealment (Chodzen et al., 2019; Livingston et al., 2020). Identity concealment, or hiding characteristics of one’s identity through changing aspects of appearance and behavior, is developed as a form of protection from real or anticipated threats in an attempt to reduce discrimination (Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2017). Examples of identity concealment include altering gender expression/appearance, changing vocal intonation, concealing health or HIV status, and/or modifying mannerisms and gestures (Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019). High levels of identity concealment heightens sensitzation to genderbased discrimination (Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019). In turn, this produces heightened emotional reactions and maladaptive emotional management and regulation, which leads to psychological distress, further exacerbating anxious and depressed moods (Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019; Puckett et al., 2020).

In relation to daily discrimination, the effects of minority stress in any form lead to negative psychological internalizations, including engaging in identity concealment (Chodzen et al., 2019; Livingston et al., 2020). More specifically, the most direct result of proximal stress in TGNC individuals is identity concealment (Livingston et al., 2020; Lloyd et al., 2019). Further, distal stress (e.g., victimization and microaggressions) results in psychological internalization and maladaptive coping mechanisms, including engaging in identity concealment (Livingston et al., 2020; Puckett et al., 2020). Identity concealment Gender, Sexuality, & Inequality • 21 Gender-Based Discrimination & TGNC Mental Health 22 is comparable to TGNC individuals’ inability to be authentic, which is associated with feelings of social rejection, shame, and perceived burdensomeness (Testa et al., 2017). Research has found that identity concealment plays an important role in explaining the disparity in mental health outcomes for TGNC individuals (Livingston et al., 2020; Price-Feeney et al., 2020; Puckett et al., 2020; Testa et al., 2017).

Additionally, the lack of protection of TGNC individuals on a structural level in social domains (e.g., housing, employment, medical) predicts increased experiences of psychosocial stressors (i.e., victimization and discrimination), and in turn, increased engagement in identity concelament (Gleason et al., 2016; Livingston et al., 2020). Employment discrimination, in particular, leads to increased perceived stigma, and TGNC individuals’ concealing their identity in the workplace to avoid experiencing this maltreatment (Gleason et al., 2016; Kattari et al., 2016). Further, in relation to medical social domains, genderbased discrimination in the form of non-affirmative treatment (i.e., lack of TGNC identity acknowledgement and acceptance by health care professionals) results in identity concealment in an attempt to avoid unfair treatment (Glick et al., 2018; Testa et al., 2017; Williams & Mann, 2017). Overall, the prominence of psychosocial stressors leads to elevated perceived stigma, which is associated with the internalization of depression and anxiety symptoms and a higher prevalence of suicidality, and engagement in identity concealment, thus heightening levels of anxiety and depression symptoms (Gleason et al., 2016; Livingston et al., 2020; McDowell et al., 2020).

Conclusion

Overall, gender-based discrimination disproportionately affects TGNC individuals’ levels of depression and anxiety symptoms, through the compounded effects of daily and structural gender-based discrimination (Brennan et al., 2017; Chodzen et al., 2019; Gleason et al., 2016; Livingston et al., 2020; Testa et al., 2017). Most notably, this compounded discrimination leads to identity concealment, which further exacerbates depression and anxiety symptoms (Chozden et al., 2019; Livingston et al., 2020). Exploring the relation between gender-based discrimination and levels of anxious and depressed moods allows researchers to address the mental health disparities and attempt to create interventions to reduce this gap. Furthermore, through the exploration of where these disparities exist, interventions to better protect TGNC individuals.

Further research needs to be conducted around the effects of discrimination on TGNC indiviuals, and specifically the effects of identity concealment. Extant research reporting the mental health effects of gender-based discrimination have limitations, including participant recruitment through convenience sampling (Gleason et al., 2016; Grzanka et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2017) and data collection through self-report measures (Glick et al., 2018; Gleason et al., 2016; Livingston et al., 2020). Additionally, these studies lack racially diverse participants, as many samples in the studies discussed comprised of mostly white participants (Chodzen et al., 2019; Grzanka et al., 2019; Hoskin, 2019; Livingston et al., 2020; Puckett et al., 2020; Testa et al., 2017). This important limitation is worth exploring more in future research, as TGNC people of color experience unique, compounded discrimination as a result of intersecting minority identities (Brennan et al., 2017; Glick et al., 2018). Through focusing on intersectionality within the TGNC community, future research on discrimination and identity concealment will be culturally competent, and may be able to lead to possible future interventions to protect these vulnerable groups.

References

Brennan, S. L., Irwin, J., Drincic, A., Amoura, N. J., Randall, A., & Smith-Sallans, M. (2017). Relationship among gender related stress, resilience factors, and mental health in a Midwestern U.S. transgender and gender-nonconforming population. International Journal of Transgenderism, 18(4), 433-445.

Chodzen, G., Hidalgo, M. A., Chen, D., & Garofalo, R. (2019). Minority stress factors associated with depression and anxiety among transgender and gender-nonconforming youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 64(4), 467-471.

Gleason, H. A., Livingston, N. A., Peters, M. M., Oost, K. M., Reely, E., & Cochran, B. N. (2016). Effects of state nondiscrimination laws on transgender and gendernonconforming individuals’ perceived community stigma and mental health. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 20(4), 350-362.

Glick, J. L., Theall, K. P., Andrinopoulos, K. M., & Kendall, C. (2018). The role of discrimination in care postponement among trans-feminine individuals in the U.S. National transgender discrimination survey. LGBT Health, 5(3), 171-179.

Grzanka, P. R., DeVore, E. N., Frantell, K. A., Miles, J. R., & Spengler, E. S. (2019). Conscience clauses and sexual and gender minority mental health care: A case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 67(5), 551–567.

Kattari, S. K., Whitfield, D. L., Walls, N. E., LangenderferMagruder, L., & Ramos, D. (2016). Policing gender through housing and employment discrimination: Comparison of discrimination experiences of transgender and cisgender LGBQ individuals. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 7(3), 427–447.

Livingston, N. A., Flentje, A., Brennan, J., Mereish, E. H., Reed, O., & Cochran, B. N. (2020). Real-time associations between discrimination and anxious and depressed mood among sexual and gender minorities: The moderating effects of lifetime victimization and identity concealment. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 7(2), 132–141.

Lloyd, J., Chalklin, V., & Bond, F. W. (2019). Psychological processes underlying the impact of gender-related discrimination on psychological distress in transgender and gender nonconforming people. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 66(5), 550-563.

McDowell, A., Raifman, J., Progovac, A. M., & Rose, S. (2020). Association of nondiscrimination policies with mental health among gender minority individuals. Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry, 77(9), 952–958.

Price-Feeney, M., Green, A. E., & Dorison, S. (2020). Understanding the mental health of transgender and nonbinary youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 66(6), 684– 690.

Puckett, J. A., Maroney, M. R., Wadsworth, L. P., Mustanski, B., & Newcomb, M. E. (2020). Coping with discrimination: The insidious effects of gender minority stigma on depression and anxiety in transgender individuals. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 76(1), 176-194.

Testa, R. J., Michaels, M. S., Bliss, W., Rogers, M. L., Balsam, K. F., & Joiner, T. (2017). Suicidal ideation in transgender people: Gender minority stress and interpersonal theory factors. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(1), 125-136.

Williams, S. L., & Mann, A. K. (2017). Sexual and gender minority health disparities as a social issue: How stigma and intergroup relations can explain and reduce health disparities. Journal of Social Issues, 73(3), 450-461.

Abby Rusnack

The internalization of society’s thinness ideal for females becomes stronger as girls mature (Rogers et al., 2015). During puberty, many girls experience a dramatic increase in body fat percentage (Siervogel et al., 2003), and hence, they are pushed further from the desired thin body type promoted by peers, family, and the media (Bucchianeri et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2020; Hutchinson & Rapee, 2007; Rodgers et al., 2015). As a consequence, adolescent girls often experience body dissatisfaction, or low self-esteem resulting from a negative body image (e.g., of weight or body shape; Martijn et al., 2014; Rogers et al., 2015). One important source of this dissatisfaction is the disconnect between messages that promote the thinness ideal (e.g., from the media, peers, and parents) and their growing bodies (Bucchianeri et al., 2013; Siervogel et al., 2003). To cope with this dissatisfaction, adolescent girls may engage in disordered eating behaviors or weight loss strategies, such as dietary restraint or skipping meals, vomiting, inappropriate use of laxatives, or smoking (Croll et al., 2002; Ricciardelli et al., 2003). These behaviors pose a significant risk to their health and overall wellbeing (Bucchianeri et al., 2013), which warrants the following research question: What factors lead to body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls?

The Roles of Media, Peers, and Parents

One influence on body dissatisfaction is media internalization (i.e., when individuals adopt media standards as something to compare themselves to; Rogers et al., 2015; Rogers et al., 2017). Research has shown that internalization of the media’s thinness ideal positively predicts body dissatisfaction and engagement in dietary restraint (Rogers et al., 2015; Rogers et al., 2017). Although girls as young as age three may begin to internalize a positive regard for a thin body type, the impact of media internalization only worsens as girls enter adolescence, when social media becomes an increasingly important part of their daily lives (Rogers et al., 2017; Rogers et al., 2020; Wilksch et al., 2019). During this time, girls have even more access to social media, which means they have more opportunities to view appearance-related images and idealize the thin body type (Meier & Gray, 2014; Scully et al., 2020). Girls may excessively compare themselves to bodies deemed more attractive than their own, thus enforcing a sense of dissatisfaction with the appearance of their own bodies, and resulting in low self-esteem (Rogers et al., 2015; Rogers et al., 2020).

While the media serves as an indirect influence, peers provide a more personal source for adolescent girls to make appearance-related comparisons that contribute to body dissatisfaction (Rayner et al., 2013). During this developmental period when girls place increasing importance on the values, attitudes, and beliefs of their friends, they are especially vulnerable to negative body image and eating disturbances encouraged by their friends (Hutchinson & Rapee, 2007). They appear to be the most susceptible to peer influence during early adolescence, perhaps because at this stage, they are forming new friendships (e.g., at the start of high school) and feel a desire to fit in (Hutchinson & Rapee, 2007). Reflecting this susceptibility, girls tend to choose peers with similar levels of body dissatisfaction and disordered eating behavior (Hutchinson & Rapee, 2007; Rayner et al. 2013). In turn, girls with high levels of peer support may also have high prevalence of disordered eating because through socialization, girls can connect over behaviors such as dietary restriction and bulimic tendencies (Croll et al., 2002; Hutchinson & Rapee, 2007; Rayner et al. 2013). This peer influence serves as a predictor of individual body concern and disordered eating behaviors (Hutchinson & Rapee, 2007).

Parental influence may be an additional reinforcer of the relationship between body dissatisfaction and disordered eating behaviors (Abdalla et al., 2020; Helfert & Warschburger, 2011; Neumark-Sztainer et al., 2010). Body dissatisfaction has been associated with adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ views of their weight and body size, which may then contribute to weight control behaviors such as dieting and over-exercising (Abdalla et al., 2020; Helfert & Warschburger, 2011). It seems that even though this influence may merely be a perception of their parents’ opinions, it still prompts adolescent girls to act on their body dissatisfaction whether or not they are correct about how their parents viewed their bodies (Abdalla et al., 2020). Further, negative comments from parents, such as teasing about physical appearance, victimize adolescent girls and reinforce the idealization of the thin body type (Abdalla et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Neumark-Sztainer et al., 2010). In turn, the negative emotions resulting from parental comments contribute to eating restraint and even emotional eating (Chen et al., 2020).

Conclusion

Society endorses the thin body type by way of various sociocultural influences and messages conveyed by the media, friends, and family. Adolescent girls, in particular, have been found to internalize these messages, resulting in body dissatisfaction and subsequent disordered eating behaviors (Croll et al., 2002; Rodgers et al., 2017). This literature review brings to light the need to target the body image messages adolescent girls hear from the media, family, and peers in order to decrease body dissatisfaction. Reducing the impact of these messages may in turn prevent disordered eating behaviors. Gender & Development • 15 Although this review presents key findings regarding factors that influence body dissatisfaction, most studies focused on a specific population (i.e., Caucasian females), revealing a major limitation due to the lack of ethnic and cultural diversity. Additionally, socioeconomic status may affect the relationship between body dissatisfaction and disordered eating behaviors and should be addressed in further studies. Future interventions should focus on promoting more positive messages around how girls see themselves and their bodies to help them have a more positive relationship with their physical appearances.

References

Abdalla, S., Buffarini, R., Weber, A. M., Cislaghi, B., Costa, J. C., Menezes, A. M. B., Gonçlaves, H., Wehrmeister, F. C., Meausoone, V., Victora, C. G., & Darmstadt, G. L. (2020). Parent-related normative perceptions of adolescents and later weight control behavior: Longitudinal analysis of cohort data from Brazil. Journal of Adolescent Health, 66(1), 9-16.

Bucchianeri, M. M., Fernandes, N., Loth, K., Hannan, P. J., Eisenberg, M. E., & Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2016). Body dissatisfaction: Do associations with disordered eating and psychological well-being differ across race/ethnicity in adolescent girls and boys? Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 22(1), 137-146.

Chen, X., Luo, Y., & Chen, H. (2020). Body image victimization experiences and disordered eating behaviors among Chinese female adolescents: The role of body dissatisfaction and depression. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 83, 442- 452.

Croll, J. K., Neumark-Sztainer, D., Story, M., & Ireland, M. (2002). Prevalence and risk and protective factors related to disordered eating behaviors among adolescents: Relationship to gender and ethnicity. Journal of Adolescent Health, 31(2), 166-175.

Helfert, S., & Warschburger, P. (2011). A prospective study on the impact of peer and parental pressure on body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls and boys. Body Image, 8(2), 101-109.

Hutchinson, D. M., & Rapee, R. M. (2007). Do friends share similar body image and eating problems? The role of social networks and peer influences in early adolescence. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(7), 1557-1577.

Martijn, C., Alleva, J. M., & Jansen, A. (2015). Improving body satisfaction: Do strategies targeting the automatic system work? European Psychologist, 20(1), 62-71.

Meier, E. P., & Gray, J. (2014). Facebook photo activity associated with body image disturbances in adolescent girls. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(4), 199-206.

Neumark-Sztainer, D., Bauer, K. W., Friend, S., Hannan, P. J., Story, M., & Berge, J. M. (2010). Family weight talk and dieting: How much do they matter for body dissatisfaction and disordered eating behaviors in adolescent girls? Journal of Adolescent Health, 47(3), 270-276.

Rayner, K. E., Schniering, C. A., Rapee, R. M., Taylor, A., & Hutchinson, D. M. (2013). Adolescent girls’ friendship networks, body dissatisfaction, and disordered eating: Examining selection and socialization processes. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122(1), 93-104.

Ricciardelli, L. A., McCabe, M. P., Holt, K. E., & Finemore, J. (2003). A biopsychosocial model for understanding body image and body change strategies among children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(4), 475-495.

Rodgers, R. F., Damiano, S. R., Wertheim, E. H., & Paxton, S. J. (2017). Media exposure in very young girls: Prospective and cross-sectional relationships with BMIz, self-esteem and body size stereotypes. Developmental Psychology, 53(12), 2356-2363.

Rodgers, R. F., McLean, S. A., & Paxton, S. J. (2015). Longitudinal relationships among internalization of the media ideal, peer social comparison, and body dissatisfaction: Implications for the tripartite influence model. Developmental Psychology, 51(5), 706-713.

Rodgers, R. F., Slater, A., Gordon, C. S., McLean, S. A., Jarman, H. K., & Paxton, S. J. (2020). A biopsychosocial model of social media use and body image concerns, disordered eating, and muscle-building behaviors among adolescent girls and boys. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(2), 399-409.

Scully, M., Swords, L., & Nixon, E. (2020). Social comparisons on social media: Online appearance-related activity and body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 1-12.

Siervogel, R. M., Demerath, E. W., Schubert, C., Remsberg, K. E., Chumlea, W. C., Sun, S., Czerwinski S. A., & Towne, B. (2003). Puberty and body composition. Hormone Research in Pediatrics, 60(1), 36-45.

Stice, E. (2002). Risk and maintenance factors for eating pathology: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 825-848.

Wilksch, S. M., O’Shea, A., Ho, P., Byrne, S., & Wade, T. D. (2019). The relationship between social media use and disordered eating in young adolescents. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 53(1), 96-106.

Yoon, C., Mason, S. M., Hooper, L., Eisenberg, M. E., & Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2019). Disordered eating behaviors and 15-year trajectories in body mass index: Findings from project Eating and Activity in Teens and Young Adults (EAT). Journal of Adolescent Health, 66(2), 181-188.

Ancelma Vazquez

Adolescence is a period of significant cognitive and socio-emotional development and is marked by an increased need for social approval, as teens seek to develop their own identities (Shah et al., 2019; Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). Adolescents gain a deeper understanding of who they are when they can flexibly experiment with different versions of themselves, and social media has become an important platform for them to practice this process (Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). Specifically, social interactions on social media networks or with online communities facilitate a cyclical relationship between adolescents and their social groups, whereby adolescents receive feedback from their groups, and then adapt and develop their personas based on the behaviors their groups endorse to continue to gain their approval (Friedland & Smith, 2013; Lenhart et al., 2015; Shah et al., 2019; Tatlow-Golden & Guerin, 2017; Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017; Yau & Reich, 2018). Moreover, past research has found that the social interactions and relationships adolescents have on social media can enhance or deflate self-esteem (Bányai et al., 2017; Huang, 2017; Saiphoo et al., 2019). Adolescent girls tend to be particularly susceptible to these effects, as they spend more time on social media than adolescent boys (Twenge & Martin, 2020). In turn, they tend to have lower levels of self-esteem and psychological well-being (i.e., life satisfaction and belonging; Abi-Jaoude et al., 2020; Twigg et al., 2020). Therefore, this literature review addressed the following question: How does social media network use affect the self-esteem of adolescent girls?

Negative Effects of Social Media Network Use on Self-esteem

Behaviors on social media networks can be categorized as either passive (e.g., scrolling or viewing posts) or active (e.g., liking, posting, commenting, etc.; Abi-Jaoude et al., 2020; Saiphoo et al., 2019; Twenge & Martin, 2020). Through passive engagement, adolescents develop an understanding of the content and activity their social environment endorses and considers normative (Yau & Reich, 2018). Based on this knowledge, adolescents tend to curate an online identity that will garner their peers’ approval on social media networks (Yau & Reich, 2018). For example, many adolescent girls create hyperfeminine online identities based on beauty standards centered around prominently White features e.g., thin noses, blonde hair, and pale skin complexions; (Mills et al., 2017). Consequently, adolescent girls may unknowingly contribute to further normalization of beauty standards and gendered norms, internalize unrealistic beauty standards endorsed on social media networks, and place high value on their sexual appeal, thereby engaging in self-objectification (Burnette et al., 2017; Twenge & Martin, 2020; Yau & Reich, 2018). Furthermore, adolescent girls internalize messages about society’s ideal body shape and/or size (Mills et al., 2017). If girls fail to meet these expectations then body dissatisfaction levels may be exacerbated, ultimately resulting in lower self-esteem levels (Andreassen et al., 2017; Burnette et al., 2017; Richards et al., 2015; Twenge & Martin, 2020; Yau & Reich, 2018).

While social media networks stimulate social interactions, they may also promote social comparisons among adolescents (Burnette et al., 2017; Saiphoo et al., 2019; Yau & Reich, 2018). Specifically, passive engagement may elicit upward social comparisons (i.e., perceived feelings of inadequacy in comparison to others), and, as a consequence, lead to feelings of envy, loneliness, and exclusion, ultimately impairing self-esteem (Yang, 2016). Conversely, active engagement (e.g., posting to acquire likes and follows) incentivizes individuals to portray idealized versions of themselves that focus primarily on the most appealing aspects of their lives, which misrepresents an overly positive image of themselves (Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). As adolescents internalize these idealized messages about what their lives should look like, they become focused on aspects of their lives that they perceive to be inadequate (Saiphoo et al., 2019; Yang. 2016; Yau & Reich, 2018). As such, the negative effects of both active and passive engagement directly impact adolescent girls’ self-esteem.

Additionally, adolescent girls may generally use their close interpersonal relationships to gauge their self-worth, and thus are more likely to seek out social acceptance from and social connectedness to their peers through social media networks (Degges-White & Borzumato-Gainey, 2011). Peer rejection online (e.g., blocking, unfriending, or receiving less likes than others) may be particularly damaging to girls’ self-esteem, because it elicits feelings of inferiority or a reduced sense of belonging (Bányai et al., 2017; Lopez & DuBois, 2005; Saiphoo et al., 2019; Twenge & Martin, 2020). Therefore, adolescent girls may internalize negative perceptions of themselves when they cannot gain the social approval of peers on social media (Lopez & DuBois, 2005; Timeo et al., 2020). Furthermore, individuals who experience peer rejection are less likely to perceive themselves as socially competent, which further diminishes their self-esteem (Lopez & DuBois, 2005).

Positive Effects of Social Media Network Use on Self-esteem

While research in this area has mainly focused on the negative effects of social media networks on self-esteem, it is important to consider its potential positive effects. The accessibility of social media networks allows adolescents to be in consistent communication with their peers, which may promote a sense of 10 community and social support beyond the constraints of physical limitations (Anderson & Jiang, 2018; Huang, 2017; Nesi, 2020; Saiphoo et al., 2019). This communication is particularly helpful for adolescents who cannot maintain connectedness with their social environment due to physical limitations to continue cultivating relationships (Huang, 2017; Saiphoo et al., 2019; Twenge & Martin, 2020). The development and strengthening of a social support network may assist adolescents in developing positive feelings and thoughts, increasing their self-esteem and decreasing their likelihood to experience lower psychological well-being outcomes (e.g., social isolation, depression, and low self-esteem; Hoffman et al., 1988). In other words, through social media interactions, adolescents strengthen their social support networks, which may mitigate the onset of negative mental health effects that impair self-esteem (O’Reilly, 2020).

Adolescent girls may also use social media networks to foster online communities and develop social support networks when their own offline social environments do not adequately provide support (Nesi, 2020). For girls recovering from disordered eating, for example, social media networks provide a medium for peer support, wherein girls build safe spaces for open discussions, offer encouragement and advice, as well as, develop friendships (Kendal et al., 2017). This exemplifies one way in which social media networks lead to the development of social support networks for adolescent girls, provide information, and can empower adolescent girls, which may lead to an increase in self-esteem levels (Nesi, 2020; O’Reilly, 2020).

Existing Levels of Self-Esteem and Social Media

The existing self-esteem levels of adolescent girls may be influential in the relations between social media network usage and self-esteem (Richards et al., 2015; Saiphoo et al., 2019; Shah et al., 2019). In particular, adolescent girls with lower levels of self-esteem are more likely to experience the negative effects of social media network use. For example, girls with low levels of self-esteem use social media networks, specifically the accumulation of “likes,” to garner peer approval (Martinez-Pecino & Garcia-Gavilán, 2019). As a consequence, adolescent girls with low levels of self-esteem are more likely to make social comparisons and become dependent on the approval of others, leading to even lower levels of self-esteem (Huang, 2017; Richards et al., 2015; Saiphoo et al., 2019). Furthermore, adolescent girls with lower levels of self-esteem are more likely to become victims of cyberbullying, because their negative view of themselves makes them more likely to accept and internalize negative comments about themselves (Forest & Wood, 2012).

In contrast, adolescent girls with higher levels of self-esteem are less likely to experience the negative effects of social media network use on their self-esteem, as they are less likely to engage in negative social comparisons on social media networks (Huang, 2017). They are also more likely to use social media networks to maintain connections with their established social environment, and, thus, have a stronger sense of belonging (Huang, 2017; Kraut et al., 2002; Saiphoo et al., 2019). Additionally, adolescent girls with higher levels of self-esteem and strong social support networks are less likely to experience cyberbullying victimization because their networks decrease feelings of loneliness while providing emotional support (Dredge et al., 2014; Forest & Wood, 2012). Therefore, high pre-existing levels of self-esteem among adolescent girls may act as a protective factor against the potential negative effects of social media networks.

Conclusion

Adolescence is a time of identity and self-esteem development that is particularly sensitive to outside influences (Saiphoo et al., 2019; Twenge & Martin, 2020). This literature review demonstrates how social interactions on social media influence self-esteem and the role existing levels of self-esteem plays in mitigating the effects of social media network use (Saiphoo et al., 2019), and, thus, has important implications for counselors, parents, and researchers. Recognizing these influences may be the first step in minimizing any harmful effects. Future research should try to explore the effects of social media network use on the self-esteem of adolescent girls from a variety of different cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds because research conducted in this area has largely focused on White communities. As social media usage continues to evolve (e.g., with the popularization of new apps and features), research will need to continue exploring its effects on adolescents’ self-esteem development.

References

Abi-Jaoude, E., Naylor, K. T., & Pignatiello, A. (2020). Smartphones, social media use and youth mental health. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 192(6), E136-E141.

Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens’ social media habits and experiences. Pew Research Center. https://www. pewresearch.org/internet/2018/11/28/teens-social-mediahabits-and-experiences/

Andreassen, C. S., Pallesen, S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). The relationship between addictive use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national survey. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 287-293.

Bányai, F., Zsila, A., Király, O., Maraz, A., Elekes, Z., Griffiths, M.D., Andreassen, C.S., & Demetrovics, Z. (2017). Problematic social media use: Results from a large-scale nationally representative adolescent sample. PLoS ONE, 12(1), 1-13.

Burnette, C. B., Kwitowski, M. A., & Mazzeo, S. E. (2017). “I don’t need people to tell me I’m pretty on social media”: A qualitative study of social media and body image in early adolescent girls. Body Image, 23, 114-125.

Degges-White, S., & Borzumato-Gainey, C. (2011). The biology of friendship. Friends forever: How girls and women forge lasting relationships (pp. 7-15). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Dredge, R., Gleeson, J. F. M., & de la Piedad Garcia, X. (2014). Risk factors associated with impact severity of cyberbullying victimization: A qualitative study of adolescent online social networking. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(5), 287–291.

Forest, A. L., & Wood, J. V. (2012). When social networking is not working: Individuals with low self-esteem recognize but do not reap the benefits of self-disclosure on Facebook. Psychological Science, 23(3), 295–302.

Friedland, L., & Smith, V. (2013). Social media. In V. Smith (Ed.), Sociology of work: An encyclopedia (pp. 50-75). Sage Publications. Huang, C. (2017). Time spent on social network sites and psychological well-being: A meta-analysis. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(60), 346-354.

Kendal, S., Kirk, S., Elvey, R., Catchpole, R., & Pryjmachuk, S. (2017). How a moderated online discussion forum facilitates support for young people with eating disorders. Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 20(1), 98– 111.

Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49-74.

Lenhart, A., Smith, A., Anderson, M., Duggan, M., & Perrin, A. (2015). Teens, technology and friendships. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/06/teenstechnology-and-friendships/

Lopez, C. & DuBois, D.L. (2005). Peer victimization and rejection: Investigation of an integrative model of effects on emotional, behavioral, and academic adjustment in early adolescence. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34(1), 25-36.

Martinez-Pecino, R., & Garcia-Gavilán, M. (2019). Likes and problematic Instagram use: The moderating role of selfesteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 22(6), 412-416.

Mills, J. S., Shannon, A., & Hogue, J. (2017). Beauty, body image and the media. In M. Levine (Ed.), Perception of beauty (pp. 145-147). IntechOpen.

Nesi J. (2020). The impact of social media on youth mental health: Challenges and opportunities. North Carolina Medical Journal, 81(2), 116–121.

O’Reilly M. (2020). Social media and adolescent mental health: The good, the bad and the ugly. Journal of Mental Health, 29(2), 200–206.

Richards, D., Caldwell, P. H. Y., & Go, H. (2015). Impact of social media on the health of children and young people. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 51(12), 1152-1157.

Saiphoo, A. N., Dahoah Halevi, L., & Vahedi, Z. (2020). Social networking site use and self-esteem: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Individual Differences, 153.

Shah, J., Das, P., Muthiah, N., & Milanaik, R. (2019). New age technology and social media: Adolescent psychosocial implications and the need for protective measures. Current Opinion in Pediatrics 31(1),148-156.

Tatlow-Golden, M., & Guerin, S. (2017). Who I am: The meaning of early adolescents’ most valued activities and relationships, and implications for self-concept research. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 37(2), 236-266.

Timeo, S., Riva, P., & Paladino, M. P. (2020). Being liked or not being liked: A study on social-media exclusion in a preadolescent population. Journal of Adolescence, 80, 173- 181.

Twenge, J. M., & Martin, G. N. (2020). Gender differences in associations between digital media use and psychological well-being: Evidence from three large datasets. Journal of Adolescence, 79, 91-102.

Twigg, L., Duncan, C., & Weich, S. (2020). Is social media use associated with children’s well-being? Results from the UK household longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescence, 80, 73-83.

Valkenburg, P. M. & Piotrowski J. M. (2017). Plugged in: How media attract and affect youth. Yale University Press. New Haven & London.

Yang, C. (2016). Instagram use, loneliness, and social comparison orientation: Interact and browse on social media, but don’t compare. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(12), 703-708. 

Yau, J. C. & Reich, S. M. (2019). “It’s just a lot of work”: Adolescents’ self-presentation norms and practices on Facebook and Instagram. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 29(1), 196-209.

Katie Mundt

Discrepancies in the occupations held by men and women persist, despite the fact that more women are entering the workforce than ever before (Schieder & Gould, 2016). Specifically, women are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields (Beede et al., 2011), which results in both social and economic consequences, such as women losing key pathways for innovation and opting out of the higher-paying jobs present in such fields (Shuster & Martiny, 2016). The most prominent factor influencing girls to choose stereotypical career paths in healthcare, early education, and domestic (HEED) fields appears to be gender stereotypes, which are widely held beliefs and expectations about acceptable behaviors for males and females (Schieder & Gould, 2016). Beginning in early childhood, girls internalize negative gender stereotypes about their academic abilities, and these beliefs persist throughout essential periods of development, ultimately influencing their academic motivations and subsequent career choices (Olsson & Martiny, 2018). Additionally, the paucity of prominent female STEM professionals, who could serve as role models for young girls to emulate, contributes to girls’ acceptance of stereotypes and later pursuit of traditional gendered jobs (Morgenroth et al., 2015; Olsson & Martiny, 2018; Shin, 2016). In order to increase gender equality in the STEM fields, there must be a more robust understanding of how gender stereotypes impact girls’ motivation and perceptions of themselves, which leads to the question: How does exposure to gender stereotypes and female role models influence girls’ academic self-concept and subsequent career decisions?

Gender Stereotypes and Academic Self-Concept

Gender stereotypes regarding academic abilities, such as the common notion that females are innately bad at science and math, are largely influential in girls’ career decisions (Nosek et al., 2008). The internalization of these negative stereotypes later contributes to girls’ academic self-concept (i.e., evaluations of their academic abilities and performance; Ertl et al., 2017). Academic self-concept, in turn, influences career decisions through the expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation, which posits that people make decisions about which activities to pursue based on their beliefs about how well they will perform (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). According to this theory, girls will be motivated to choose courses of study for career paths that they believe they will thrive in based on the stereotypes with which they are presented (Ertl et al., 2017; Wigfield et al., 2002). One specific way in which stereotypes negatively impact girls’ academic self-concept is through stereotype threat (i.e., the risk that members of traditionally marginalized groups might confirm a negative generalization about their group; Ertl et al., 2017; Steele & Aronson, 1995). Specifically, when girls are presented with and internalize stereotypes about their academic abilities, they tend to perform worse in science and math subjects compared to their male peers (Shapiro & Williams, 2012). It is precisely this combination of decreased performance and subsequent lower academic self-concept that disincentivizes girls to pursue STEM related studies and careers (Ertl et al., 2017; Rost et al., 2005; Shapiro & Williams, 2012; Steele & Aronson, 1995).

Gender stereotypes also influence academic self-concept through social relationships and interactions (Ertl et al., 2017; Rost et al., 2005). Specifically, parents and teachers project their own gender stereotypes onto children through their assessment and appraisal of academic abilities that align with the stereotype (Ertl et al., 2017). For example, when girls receive encouragement for their success in traditionally femaledominated subjects (e.g., English or history), they further internalize these stereotypes into their academic self-concepts (Ertl et al., 2017). Sometimes, these stereotypes exert such a powerful influence on girls’ perceptions of the world that they are unaware of opportunities in traditionally male sectors, such as STEM fields (Eccles, 1994). This lack of awareness may translate to a complete dismissal of nontraditional career paths (e.g., in STEM), further contributing to the gender gap (Eccles, 1994). Clearly, gender stereotypes perpetuated through social relationships have exceptional influence over girls’ academic self-concept, in turn leading them to pursue careers that align with traditional gender stereotypes to which they are exposed (Eccles, 1994; Ertl et al., 2017).

Female Role Models and Academic Self-Concept

Another determinant of academic self-concept is the absence or presence of role models (i.e., people in particular roles who exemplify ideal behaviors associated with their role). Moreover, the presence of a role model may have exceptional influence on members of disadvantaged groups (Morgenroth et al., 2015). Specifically, role models in nontraditional roles can break stereotypes, in turn altering girls’ perceptions of gender stereotypes and ultimately resulting in a more positive outcome for girls’ motivation to pursue nontraditional career paths (Olsson & Martiny, 2018; Quimby & DeSantis, 2006; Smith & Erb, 1986). Through observing counter-stereotypical role models similar to them (i.e., female professionals in science), girls’ attitudes toward their abilities and the roles they are fit to fill are altered (Gilbert, 1985; Stout et al., 2011). As attitudes about ability have been shown to predict career choices (Ertl et Gender & Development • 7 OPUS (2020) 11:2 al., 2017; Rost et al., 2005; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000; Wigfield et al., 2002), gender-similar role models may influence girls’ interest in STEM. Additionally, expposure to prominent female STEM professionals can increase young girls’ interest in the field through enhancing their sense of belonging and feelings of compatibility, which have been shown to be a largely influential factor in the pursuit and retention of certain fields of study among underrepresented groups, such as girls in STEM (Shin et al., 2016; Stout et al., 2011). Thus, the presence of female STEM role models has the potential to encourage more girls to pursue careers in the field (Olsson & Martiny, 2018; Shin et al., 2016).

While most of the literature supports theories regarding the benefits of role models (Olsson & Martiny, 2018; Quimby & DeSantis, 2006; Shin et al., 2016; Smith & Erb, 1986; Stout et al., 2011), there is a lack of literature exploring the opposite effects that may occur in their absence. Some researchers have theorized that the underrepresentation of women in STEM-related fields further contributes to stereotypes and may demonstrate that girls lack the necessary skills and abilities to perform well, making them unlikely to succeed (Olsson & Martiny, 2018). Further, the absence of prominent female figures in STEM may serve as a message to young girls that they do not belong in the field, because representation communicates compatibility (Shuster & Martiny, 2016). In the absence of a counter-stereotypical role model, girls are more likely to be exposed to traditional gender roles (i.e., social roles deemed appropriate for each gender), which would further contribute to gender stereotypical ability beliefs, ultimately leading girls to embrace these stereotypes and impacting future career goals (Eccles, 1994; Olsson & Martiny, 2018).

Role models can influence girls’ academic self-concept and subsequent behaviors through a variety of mechanisms. According to the Motivational Theory of Role Models, this influence can occur through three distinct ways: behavioral modeling, representing the possible, and inspiring goals (Morgenroth et al., 2015). A role model exhibits behavior modeling when they demonstrate a specific skill set that an aspirant (e.g., impressionable young person) observes and mirrors to develop that same skill set (Morgenroth et al., 2015). Beyond behavior modeling, a role model can serve as a representation of what may be achievable through their mere existence (Morgenroth et al., 2015). In a study seeking to confirm the mechanisms proposed by this theory, middle school girls’ sense of fit (i.e. sense of belonging) with STEM subjects was measured prior to and after exposure to female STEM leaders (i.e. role models; O’Brien et al., 2016). They found that girls who identified most strongly with their role models, in terms of gender, race/ethnicity, and interests, increased their sense of fit with STEM, further confirming the importance of role model exposure (O’Brien et al., 2016). Goal inspiration is unrelated to the other two mechanisms because, in this purpose, role models influence the adoption of new goals, as aspirants simply strive to be similar to their role models and develop goals accordingly (Morgenroth et al., 2015). Though these functions are related, they lead to distinct outcomes for the individuals being influenced (Morgenroth et al., 2015). Effective role models should provide all three functions to influence both goal setting and the achievement of extant goals to encourage more girls to pursue nontraditional careers in STEM (Morgenroth et al., 2015).

Conclusion

Gender stereotypes largely influence the increasing gender gap in STEM-related fields by leading girls to develop a negative academic self-concept relating to science and math subjects, which in turn decreases their motivation to pursue STEM-related activities (Ertl et al., 2017; Olsson & Martiny, 2017; Wigfield et al., 2002). The gender gap persists despite the fact that it is widely acknowledged and that many interventions have aimed to decrease the impact of gender stereotypes. Understanding the motivation behind girls’ early academic interests and choices can help to identify where interventions might be implemented to encourage interest and participation in STEM (Shin et al., 2016; Wigfield & Eccles, 2000; Wigfield et al., 2002). One key mechanism through which gender stereotypes are learned and internalized is the observance of role models, so exposure to counter-stereotypical role models presents a potential future intervention to address this growing issue (Olsson & Martiny, 2017; Shin, 2016). If girls are presented with negative ability stereotypes and observe role models in stereotypical gendered jobs in HEED fields, they will not feel compatible with STEM subjects, making them less likely to believe they will succeed and consequently less likely to pursue STEM careers (Olsson & Martiny, 2018; Shuster & Martiny, 2016; Wigfield et al., 2002). As discussed previously, exposure to counter stereotypical role models (e.g., female science teachers) may increase girls’ interest in STEM through enhancing their feelings of compatibility and altering their ability beliefs and in turn, their perception of the roles they are ought to fill (Gilbert, 1985; Olsson & Martiny, 2018; Shin et al., 2016; Smith & Erb, 1986). As role models have been shown to impact ability beliefs and perceptions of attainable goals, future research should focus on measuring girls’ beliefs, aspirations, and subsequent behavior relating to exposure of gender counter-stereotypical role models. This research may contribute to a more robust conclusion about the impact of stereotypes on girls’ career choices and help to address the problematic gender gap in STEM-related fields.

References

Beede, D., Julian, T., Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Khan, B., Doms, M. (2011). Women in STEM: A gender gap to innovation. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ ED523766.pdf

Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2016). The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(33), 789-865.

Eccles, J. E. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585-609.

Ertl, B., Luttenburger, S., & Paechter, M. (2017). The impact of gender stereotypes on the self-concept of female students in STEM subjects with an underrepresentation of females. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 703.

Gilbert, L.A. (1985). Dimensions of same-gender studentfaculty role-model relationships. Sex Roles, 12(1-2), 111- 123.

Morgenroth, T., Ryan, M. K., & Peters, K. (2015). The motivational theory of role modeling: How role models influence role aspirants’ goals. Review of General Psychology, 19(4), 465-483.

O’Brien, L.T., Hitti, A., Shaffer, E., Van Camp, A.R., Henry, D., Gilbert, P.N. (2016). Improving girls’ sense of fit in science: Increasing the impact of role models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(3), 301-309.

Olsson, M. & Martiny, S. E. (2018). Does exposure to counterstereotypical role models influence girls’ and women’s gender stereotypes and career choices? A review of social psychological research. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2264.

Quimby, J. L. & DeSantis, A.M. (2006). The influence of role models on women’s career choices. Career Development Quarterly, 54(4), 297-306.

Rost, D. H., Sparfeldt, J. R., Dickhäuser, O., & Schilling, S. R. (2005). Dimensional comparisons in subject-specific academic self-concepts and achievements: A quasiexperimental approach. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 557-570.

Schieder, J., & Gould, E. (2016). Women’s work and the gender pay gap. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi. org/publication/womens-work-and-the-gender-pay-gaphow-discrimination-societal-norms-and-other-forcesaffect-womens-occupational-choices-and-their-pay/

Shapiro, J. R., & Williams, A. M. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66, 175-183.

Shin, J. E., Levy, S.R., & London, B. (2016). Effects of role model exposure on STEM and non-STEM student engagement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(7), 410-427.

Shuster, C., & Martiny, S. E. (2017). Not feeling good in STEM: Effects of stereotype activation and anticipated affect on women’s career aspirations. Sex Roles, 76, 40-55.

Smith, W. S. & Erb, T. O. (1986). Effect of women science career role models on early adolescents’ attitudes toward scientists and women in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 667-676.

Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual threat of African-Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811.

Stout, J.G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M.A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(2), 255-270.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81. https://10.1006/ceps.1999.1015

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J.S., Fredricks, J.A., Simpkins, S., Roeser, R.W. & Schiefele, U. (2015). Development of achievement motivation and engagement. In R.M. Lerner (Ed.) Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, (6th ed., pp. 933-1002). Academic Press, Hoboken, NJ.