SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar / 2026 / Cilt: 18 Sayı: Supplement 1 Özel Sayı

Turkish Adaptation of the LGBTQIA+ Minority Stress Scale and Evaluation of Its Psychometric Properties

LGBTQİA+ Azınlık Stresi Ölçeği'nin Türkçe Uyarlaması ve Psikometrik Özelliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Yunus Kara(SINOP UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-7812-5845
Pages
601–624
Publication Date
2026-10-18
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The overall Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients were 0.922 and 0.932, respectively, while Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the subscales ranged from 0.701 to 0.901.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to adapt the LGBTQIA+ Minority Stress Scale into Turkish and evaluate its psychometric properties.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: A total of 660 LGBTQIA+ people living in Türkiye participated in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients were 0.922 and 0.932, respectively, while Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the subscales ranged from 0.701 to 0.901.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Azınlık Stresi · Cinsel ve Cinsiyet Azınlıkları · Psikolojik Stres

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to adapt the LGBTQIA+ Minority Stress Scale into Turkish and evaluate its psychometric properties. Method: A total of 660 LGBTQIA+ people living in Türkiye participated in the study. To examine the scale's 25-item structure, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted using data from 340 participants, followed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) using data from 320 participants. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients. Temporal stability was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), based on test–retest data from 144 participants who were reached again 21 days after the initial administration. Convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity were examined. The Perceived Victimization Scale and the General Belongingness Scale were used to assess criterion-related validity. Results: EFA yielded a seven-factor structure consistent with the original scale, which was subsequently confirmed through CFA. The structure explained 56.60% of the total variance. The overall Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients were 0.922 and 0.932, respectively, while Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the subscales ranged from 0.701 to 0.901. CFA indicated an acceptable model fit (RMSEA = 0.038, CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, SRMR = 0.037). Test–retest analyses indicated high temporal stability (ICC = 0.91, r = 0.84). The validity findings supported the scale's underlying theoretical structure. Conclusion: The Turkish version of the LGBTQIA+ Minority Stress Scale was found to be a valid and reliable instrument for assessing minority stress experiences among LGBTQIA+ people living in Türkiye.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, LGBTQİA+ Azınlık Stresi Ölçeği'nin Türkçeye uyarlanması ve psikometrik özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Araştırmaya Türkiye'de yaşayan 660 LGBTQİA+ birey katılmıştır. Ölçeğin 25 maddelik yapısını incelemek amacıyla 340 katılımcının verileriyle Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA), 320 katılımcının verileriyle Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) gerçekleştirilmiştir. İç tutarlılık Cronbach alfa ve McDonald's omega katsayılarıyla; zamansal kararlılık ise ilk uygulamadan 21 gün sonra yeniden ulaşılan 144 katılımcının verileriyle Pearson korelasyon katsayısı ve Sınıf İçi Korelasyon Katsayısı (ICC) kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Yakınsak, ayrışma ve ölçüt geçerliği incelenmiş; ölçüt geçerliği kapsamında Algılanan Mağduriyet Ölçeği ve Genel Aidiyet Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: AFA sonucunda özgün yapıyla uyumlu yedi faktörlü yapı elde edilmiş ve DFA ile doğrulanmıştır. Bu yapı toplam varyansın %56,60'ını açıklamıştır. Ölçeğin toplam Cronbach alfa ve McDonald's omega katsayıları sırasıyla 0,922 ve 0,932; alt boyutlara ilişkin Cronbach alfa katsayıları ise 0,701–0,901 arasında bulunmuştur. DFA sonucunda model uyumu kabul edilebilir düzeyde bulunmuştur (RMSEA = 0,038, CFI = 0,94, TLI = 0,93, SRMR = 0,037). Test-tekrar test analizleri yüksek zamansal kararlılığa işaret etmiştir (ICC = 0,91, r = 0,84). Geçerlik bulguları ölçeğin kuramsal yapısını desteklemiştir. Sonuç: LGBTQİA+ Azınlık Stresi Ölçeği'nin Türkçe formunun, Türkiye'de yaşayan LGBTQİA+ bireylerin azınlık stresi deneyimlerini değerlendirmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kara, Y. (2026). Turkish Adaptation of the LGBTQIA+ Minority Stress Scale and Evaluation of Its Psychometric Properties. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, Cilt: 18 Sayı: Supplement 1 Özel Sayı, 601–624. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.2015900

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (42)

  1. Aquino K, Grover SL, Bradfield M, Allen DG (1999) The effects of negative affectivity, hierarchical status, and self-determination on workplace victimization. Acad Manage J, 42:260-272.
  2. Barburoğlu Y, Özgülük Üçok SB, Çürükvelioğlu Köksal E, Gandhi Y, Lannutti PJ (2024) LGBT Topluluğuna Bağlılık Ölçeğinin Türkçe formunun psikometrik özelliklerinin sınanması. Stud Psychol, 44:106-124.
  3. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25:3186-3191.
  4. Blažev M, Popov M, Laginja P (2025) Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of the Minority Stress Scale among lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals in Croatia. Sex Res Soc Policy, 22:1179-1192.
  5. Boateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quiñonez HR, Young SL (2018) Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Front Public Health, 6:149.
  6. Clark LA, Watson D (1995) Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychol Assess, 7:309-319.
  7. Comrey AL, Lee HB (1992) A first course in factor analysis, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
  8. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL (1991) Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures: Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials, 12(Suppl 4):142S-158S.
  9. Diamond LM, Alley J (2022) Rethinking minority stress: A social safety perspective on the health effects of stigma in sexually-diverse and gender-diverse populations. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 138:104720.
  10. Dinno A (2018) Package Paran: Horn's Test of Principal Components/Factors. R Package.
  11. Duru E (2015) Genel Aidiyet Ölçeğinin psikometrik özellikleri: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 5:37-47.
  12. Flentje A, Heck NC, Brennan JM, Meyer IH (2020) The relationship between minority stress and biological outcomes: A systematic review. J Behav Med, 43:673-694.
  13. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res, 18:39-50.
  14. Frost DM, Meyer IH (2023) Minority stress theory: Application, critique, and continued relevance. Annu Rev Clin Psychol, 19:79-102.
  15. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2022) Multivariate Data Analysis, 9th ed. Hampshite, UK, Cengage Learning.
  16. Hatzenbuehler ML (2009) How does sexual minority stigma "get under the skin"? A psychological mediation framework. Psychol Bull, 135:707-730.
  17. Hatzenbuehler ML, Pachankis JE (2016) Stigma and minority stress as social determinants of health among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Pediatr Clin North Am, 63:985-997.
  18. Hayes AF, Coutts JJ (2020) Use omega rather than Cronbach's alpha for estimating reliability. Commun Methods Meas, 14:1-24.
  19. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci, 43:115-135.
  20. Iniewicz G, Sałapa K, Wrona M, Marek N (2017) Minority stress among homosexual and bisexual individuals—From theoretical concepts to research tools: The Sexual Minority Stress Scale. Arch Psychiatry Psychother, 19:69-80.
  21. Jaspal R (2025) A theoretical model for predicting outness in lesbian, gay, and bisexual people: Minority stressors, social support, and identity processes. Soc Sci, 14:207.
  22. Jorgensen TD, Pornprasertmanit S, Schoemann AM, Rosseel Y (2022) semTools: Useful Tools for Structural Equation Modeling. R Package.
  23. Kara Y (2026) “When you can’t hold on to society, you hold on to something else”: A mixed-methods study on substance use among LGBTQIA+ people in Türkiye. Subst Use Misuse, 61:707-717.
  24. Karakaş S (2024) Günlük Heteroseksist Deneyimler Ölçeğinin Türkçe uyarlaması, geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışması (Tıpta uzmanlık tezi). İstanbul, Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi.
  25. Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med, 15:155-163.
  26. Korkmaz S, Goksuluk D, Zararsiz G (2014) MVN: An R package for assessing multivariate normality. R J, 6:151-162.
  27. Krok A, Kardasz Z, Rogowska AM (2024) Network analysis of the association between minority stress and activism in LGB people from Poland. Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ, 14:1853-1867.
  28. Li CH (2016) Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behav Res Methods, 48:936-949.
  29. Malone GP, Pillow DR, Osman A (2012) The General Belongingness Scale (GBS): Assessing achieved belongingness. Pers Individ Dif, 52:311-316.
  30. Meyer IH (2003) Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull, 129:674-697.
  31. Meyer IH, Frost DM (2013) Minority stress and the health of sexual minorities. In Handbook of Psychology and Sexual Orientation (Eds CJ Patterson, AR D'Augelli):252-266. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  32. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL et al. (2010) The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: An international Delphi study. Qual Life Res, 19:539-549.
  33. Nebot-Garcia JE, Barrientos J, Gil-Llario MD, Ballester-Arnal R (2026) Adaptation and validation of the LGBTQIA+ Minority Stress Measure in Spanish adults. Arch Sex Behav, 55:1989-2007.
  34. Norcini Pala A, Dell'Amore F, Steca P, Clinton L, Sandfort T, Rael C (2017) Validation of the Minority Stress Scale among Italian gay and bisexual men. Psychol Sex Orientat Gend Divers, 4:451-461.
  35. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd ed. New York, McGraw-Hill.
  36. Outland PL (2016) Developing the LGBT minority stress measure (Master's thesis). Fort Collins, CO, Colorado State University.
  37. Pachankis JE, Williams SL, Behari K, Job S, McConocha EM, Chaudoir SR (2020) Brief online interventions for LGBTQ young adult mental and behavioral health: A randomized controlled trial in a high-stigma, low-resource context. J Consult Clin Psychol, 88:429-444.
  38. R Core Team (2023) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
  39. Revelle W (2023) psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. R Package.
  40. Şahin AB, Büyükgök D, Uysal Ö, Kulaksizoğlu IB (2023) A preliminary validation of Gender Minority Stress and Resilience Measure in Turkish transgender individuals. J LGBTQ Issues Couns, 17:271-288.
  41. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2019) Using Multivariate Statistics, 7th ed. Boston, Pearson.
  42. Ülbeği İD, Özgen H, Özgen HM (2014) Algılanan mağduriyet ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 23:284-298.