Running head: THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING

AND STRESS LEVELS

The Impact of Heteronormativity in a Small Liberal Arts University on Sense of Belonging and
Stress Levels in Student LGB Population
Psy333: Research Proposal
Kari Jones
Averett University

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
2

Abstract
The student LGB population faces unique challenges because of its minority sexual identity
status. This is due to a social construction that marks heterosexuality as the only socially
acceptable sexual identification. This belief is ingrained in the social network surrounding every
individual and thus creates a constant barrage of stressors for those not sharing the identity. In a
campus climate these stressors are theorized to be more concentrated and therefore have a more
significant effect on the LGB populations mental well-being. In order to fill the gaps in the
literature, this study will specifically examine the impact of heteronormativity in a small liberal
arts university on the sense of belonging and stress levels in the LGB population. In addition, it
will analyze the dual relationship between sense of belonging and stress levels, as well as
determine if a high rating of perceived heteronormative discrimination can predict low sense of
belonging levels and high stress levels. Following this, the results will be further analyzed in
regards to participant demographics to garner additional findings of subset variations within the
population. This will allow for thorough examination of the topic variables and subsequent
discussion on their scientific and social value.

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
3

The Impact of Heteronormativity in a Small Liberal Arts University on Sense of Belonging and
Stress Levels in Student LGB Population
According to Meyer (2007), the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual (LGB) population
experiences stress in a unique, chronic, and socially based way. Discrimination against the LGB
population is a rampant issue that is often approved of by members of society (Schneider, 2004).
This is due to the social construct of heteronormativity which, based on Oxford Dictionaries, is
defined as, denoting or relating to a world view that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or
preferred sexual orientation (Heteronormative, 2014). The impact of heteronormativity, in
acts of heterosexism and homophobia, is reasoned by Rankin (2005) to be most often aggravated
by instances of LGB openly expressing themselves in ways that are outside of the norm
creating a culture of silence out of fear of deviance.
Schneider (2004) suggests that the prejudice created by a primarily heteronormative
society has extensive effects because of the depth of the heteronormative cues that establish
continuous reinforcement into our mental processes. So it would follow, according to Ripley,
Anderson, McCormack, and Rockett (2012), that there would be a strong presence of
heteronormativity in all aspects of society, including all levels of education. Even in democratic
societies, like the United States, heterosexuality remains the principle in classroom discourse and
campus structure.
When faced with a concentrated version of the general heteronormative climate in a
college campus, particularly those with more traditional cultural values, groups like the LGB
population tend to experience decreased sense of belonging based on the lower social status

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
4

(Green, 2008; Ostrove, Stewart, & Curtin, 2011). Green (2008) goes on to indicate that this
social stratification creates, a constant comparison process that, when unfavorable towards
them, may be internalized, creating a negative self-concept (p. 443) and thus impacting
negatively their sense of belonging to the critical social surroundings. This is particularly
pertinent because of the importance of group identities in an individuals social health (Meyer,
2007). Thus, in not meeting this social health need due to a possibly restrictive campus
environment, students may manifest increased symptom risk of low sense of belonging and
heightened stress related problems.
Darling, McWey, Howard, and Olmstead (2007) found that those faced with increased
stress levels without resources are more prone to leaving college, returning home, and of making
poor career choices. According to Green (2008), this can lead to depression, anxiety, social
isolation, and decreased motivation (p. 448). According to Rankin (2005), the constant social
pressure placed on LGB students can have a significant impact on their ability to obtain their full
academic potential and feel inclusive to outside campus communities. The 2005 study by Rankin
is one of few studies that extensively addresses the climate of college campuses for LGB
students. The study revealed that over one-third of sexual minority students had suffered
harassment within the year (Rankin, 2005). Even more alarming was that Rankin (2005) found
that 74% of students felt the campus environment was homophobic, and that 51% of LGB
members hid their sexual identity status in order to avoid discrimination.
This compilation of research leads to compelling gaps in the research and suggest new
study opportunities. A significant gap in the Rankin (2005) study is that of all 14 colleges and
universities surveyed, each of them had established LGB visibility with resources specifically

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
5

directed to the LGB population. However, this is disproportionate to the average campus
cultural layout, as there are fewer than 100 institutions nationally that have made such resources
available (Rankin, 2005). Many liberal arts colleges and universities claim to be open to any
student willing to work hard for success; yet students with lifestyles that challenge their
institutional norms often meet resistance when confronted with the small individualized
atmosphere that comes with a smaller institute (Kuh, 2001). Fone (2000) explains that
homophobia can be a particularly acceptable prejudice, particularly in social groupings
affiliated with religions that have historically negative outlooks on non-heterosexuality. This
suggests that the picture painted by the Rankin 2005 study, and others like it, may in fact be
overly optimistic of campus environments for LGB students, and thus actually undermining the
significant mental, emotional, and physical effects on the students.
The research proposed will look at the impact of heteronormative social structures in a
small Liberal Arts University and its related impact on LGB stress levels and general sense of
belonging. This research has the potential to help fill the gap on campus climate for LGBs in a
condensed and increased heteronormative setting. The findings will also reveal any variations in
stress and sense of belonging levels between the institutions afforded LGB resources in the
Rankin study and those without. Because a greater proportion of colleges and universities in the
United States are without such resources, this is an opportunity to increase the understanding of
the associated health impacts to a larger range of the LGB population. The data received from the
study also has the potential to help administration and faculty make changes in the campus
structure to improve retention and graduation rates that may be lower in the LGB population
because of the health problems associated with sense of belonging and stress levels. Lastly, it
may further develop insight into the factor of low sense of belonging in association to the

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
6

cultural separation and prejudice stemmed from the heteronormative social structure. Particularly
as this then leads a significant number of LGBs to divert to non-heteronormative bars for their
perceived social safety - leading them to higher rates of health issues involved in related stimuli
of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drug abuse (Greenwood & Gruskin, 2007). Overall, the possible
data results could have far reaching impacts on the way LGBs relate to educational institutions.
Review of the Literature
To understand the need for research on the impact of heteronormativity in a small liberal
arts university on sense of belonging and stress levels in the LGB population, its important to
understand what literature is already available on the subject. Research and scholarly
documentation vary in its association to the topic and thus a compilation was made to bring the
important factors of the discussion together through the various modes of literature.
Throughout academia and social discourse various terms are used when characterizing
the LGBTQQIAA population. In the resources used, the terms LGBTQ, LGBT, LGB, Lesbian
and Gay respectively, as well as Sexual Minorities were used interchangeably to represent
similar populations. For the sake of a cohesive body, as well as to tie the literature to the topic,
the term LGB will be used in reference to the given population.
While there remains no current, relevant, resources on the exact topic, there remains
relevant research on the respective areas. Two resources were found covering Dehumanization
and Stereotyping (Gervais, 2013; Schneider, 2004). Three resources were found discussing the
complex issues specifically regarding LGB culture and heteronormative impact (Bell & Binnie,
2000; Fone, 2000; Warren, 1974). Six articles were found that primarily focused on issues of
mental health and factors that directly impact mental health (Darling, McWey, Howard,

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
7

Olmstead, 2007; Elliot et al., 2014; Green, 2008; Greenwood, 2007; Herek, Chopp, Strohl, 2007;
Meyer, 2007). One article was found that discussed how institutions of higher education are
appraised, including key factors like resources and campus cultures (Kuh, 2001). In addition to
this, resources were culled from the various areas of education regarding the LGB population.
These resources covered high school, undergraduate programs, and graduate programs on the
scope of faculty and administration as well as the student body (Blount, 2005; Crew, 1978;
Mancini, 2013; Ostrove, Stewart, Curtin 2011; Rankin, 2005; Ripley, Anderson, McCormack,
Rockett, 2012; Walling, 1996).
First, Heteronormativity and its impact will be discussed. This is important for setting a
framework in understanding the organization of society and how this can be observed. Then,
stressors in the LGB population will be discussed, followed by LGB and education.
Heteronormativity and its Impact
The concept of a heteronormative society can be defined as, denoting or relating to a
world view that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation
(Heteronormative, 2014). While this concept may be somewhat foreign to the general public,
its been documented and discussed in the academics of LGB issues (Bell & Binnie, 2000; Fone,
2000; Walling, 1996).
Presentation of Heteronormativity in Society
Same sex romance and sexual intercourse has been prevalent in society and documented
in literature from as early as pre-biblical eras and throughout the progression of civilization to
modern times (Fone, 2000; Warren, 1974). However, with the wide-spread advancement of
religious and political propaganda denouncing the LGB population using the availability of

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
8

modern era media, this has had a significantly negative impact on LGB acceptance in society
(Bell & Binnie, 2000; Blount, 2005; Meyer, 2007). Fone (2000) goes on to discuss how the
prevalence of homophobia (fear and inherent discrimination against the LGB population) has
resulted in a biased society and restricted its moral advancement. The literature expands on this
by discussing the way a heterosexual centered society is organized to exclude those in other areas
of the sexual identity spectrum (Herek, Chopp, & Strohl, 2007; Fone, 2000; Warren, 1974)
Heteronormativity in the Visual Media
From birth, people in modern society are bombarded with visual images of how society is
supposed to work through media (movies, TV shows, commercials, news, internet
representation, billboard signs, etc.). Such images overwhelmingly represent the heterosexual
image of family and relationships (Bell & Binnie, 2000; Warren, 1974). When a LGB individual
is given representation in recreational media (at less than one percent in relation to heterosexual
representation) it is usually in order to further the purpose of the heterosexual character as a
comedic device or plot twist (Bell & Binnie, 2000). Additionally, recreational media and
advertisements have shown a recent trend in corporate societies of representing the LGB
population in assisting and superficial roles in order to garner them as consumers (Bell & Binnie,
2000; Warren, 1974). There is no scientifically significant representation in children and young
adult visual media of LGB individuals, garnering significant concern as the LGB population
reports significant mental distress growing up in regards to lack of representation of themselves
in their environment and thus not being able to recognize their identities (Walling, 1996; Warren,
1974).
Stressors in the LGB Population

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
9

Meyer (2007) discusses the way in which prejudice and discrimination, stemming
from heteronormativity, act as social stressors and impact the mental and emotional well-being of
the LGB population in a variety of ways. The negative impacts are presented in symptoms such
as mental illness, addiction, and intercommunity distress.
Mental Illness
Academics such as Herek, Chopp, and Strohl (2007) report findings that the stigma on
the LGB population creates higher levels of stress, anxiety, depression, eating disorders, poor
sleep patterns, and poor self-perception. Such findings are supported by a 2014 study that found
a scientifically significant disparity in mental health in the LGB population, as well as more
negative perceptions of health care based on experience (an average of 27.4 % in LGB compared
to 20% in heterosexuals) (Elliot et al., 2014). The article discusses how the fear of negative
perception by health care professionals, or negative experiences with homophobic health care
professionals, made LGB individuals afraid to disclose pertinent health information in regards to
their sexual identity - further distressing their mental and physical health (Elliot et al., 2014). The
discussion on higher levels of mental illness paired with higher levels of suicide and self-harm in
the LGB population shows little sign of decreasing in future years (Bell & Binnie, 2000; Herek
et al., 2007; Green, 2008).
Addiction
An additional illness that has shown prevalence in the research is that of addiction,
particularly that of alcohol and substance abuse (Elliot et al., 2014, Greenwood, 2007, Herek et.
al, 2007, Warren, 1974). This has been discussed as a symptom of escapism from the
discrimination and social stigma created by heteronormativity (Greenwood, 2007; Warren,

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
10

1974). A consideration of the trend of higher alcohol abuse is the link of LGB-friendly recreation
as primarily bars and clubs (Bell & Binnie, 2000; Green, 2008).
Intercommunity Stressors
Literature shows that not only does the LGB population receive social stress from those
outside their community, but from within as well; this is due to ingrained heteronormative values
in LGB individuals (Green, 2008; Herek et al., 2007). This translates into hierarchal social status
in many LGB social groups that present those with more stereotypical heterosexual features and
behavior as most desirable (Green, 2008). It also pressures those within the community to form
relationships with one person as the more masculine and the other as more effeminate, thus
restricting the expression of nonconforming LGB individuals (Bell & Binnie, 2000; Warren,
1974).
LGB and Education
Studies show that in the same way heteronormativity suppresses the LGB community in
general society, so it also does in the levels of education (Blount; 2005; Ripley et al., 2012;
Walling, 1996). Relevant literature to the topic includes the social structure of colleges, the
subsequent lack of LGB inclusion, and the research tying this to sense of belonging and stress
levels.
Social Structure of Colleges
Research and public discourse reveals that the climate of an institution in which students
are submerged has significant impact on the extent the students feel they belong (Mancini, 2013;
Ostrove et al., 2011; Rankin, 2005). Furthermore, it reveals that campuses with cultural climates

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
11

including traditional or religious foundations, are significantly more exclusionary of the cultures
within the institution that differ (Kuh, 2001; Ostrove et al., 2011). Research and observations by
Ostrove et al. shows signs that college institutions favor students academically, financially, and
socially that represent the institutions cultural climate (2011). This supports assumptions by
academics that students outside of the preferred social structure (such as the LGB population) are
given less positive reinforcement, support, and opportunities for furthering their success (Ostrove
et al., 2011; Rankin, 2005; Ripley et al., 2012; Walling, 1996).
Lack of LGB Inclusion
In the average classroom/lecture hall, heterosexuality remains the primary representation
in educational resources (Ripley et al., 2012). In addition, many educational institutions lack staff
that are educated on LGB issues and sensitivity (Blount, 2005; Walling, 1996). Literature shows
that this only fosters the outside heteronormative values and allows for prejudice and
discrimination against the LGB population (Rankin, 2005; Walling 1996). A recent Rankin study
on the campus climate in select universities in regards to the LGB population shows findings that
further support such discourse. More than one-third of undergraduate LGB students have
experienced harassment within the past year, 20 percent of participants feared for their physical
safety because of their LGB status, 51 percent concealed their LGB status to avoid
discrimination, and an alarming majority of participants described their campus climates as
homophobic (73% of faculty, 74% of students, 81% of administrators, and 73% of staff) (Rankin,
2005). Such findings, when backed by the additional literature presented, lead to concern by
academics on the well-being of the population in an environment purported to be more tolerant

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
12

than many other social structures (such as the work place and family structures) (Blount, 2005;
Crew, 1978).
Sense of Belonging and Stress Levels
The college experience is one of newfound autonomy and a transition into adulthood; in
effect, this is a period of high stress for any young adult choosing to pursue higher education
(Darling et al., 2007). Without a strong sense of support from social networking and their
institution, students can find themselves overloaded by stress and can develop a low sense of
belonging to their social environment. Those suffering from such symptoms are more likely to
return home, not complete school, and have low advancement in their careers (Darling et al.,
2007; Ostrove et al., 2011). The impact and fear of discrimination based on LGB status has
shown significant links to individuals retreating from society as well as increased stress levels
(Meyer, 2007; Green, 2008). This relates to research linking such symptoms to the increased
mental illness and substance abuse rates in the LGB population.
Gaps in the Literature
While there are valid literary resources on many of the various segments of the topic,
there is no research specifically focused on how all of the components interact. The Rankin
(2005) study is currently the most expansive research regarding campus climate, and while the
results in the study show significant signs for concern, the study shows only institutions that have
resources for LGB students. These resources included trained staff on LGB issues, clubs and
groups, as well as courses with a significant focus on the LGB population. However, such
institutions are the minority in the overall campus climates in the United States (less than 100
nationally) (Rankin, 2005). There is no research on the impact in smaller liberal arts universities

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
13

that tend to have more traditional campus cultures. In addition, several of the studies and literary
discussions have a limited survey of racial minorities (Elliot et al., 2014; Rankin, 2005; Ripley,
2012; Walling, 1996; Warren, 1974). Despite racial minorities being statistically more likely to
be of LGB status than Caucasian participants (Ripley, 2012; Warren, 1974). While much of the
literature touches on symptoms like stress and similar concepts as sense of belonging, there are
no studies looking directly at these concepts relationship together and in regards to small campus
life in the LGB population.
Conclusion
Despite a recent surge in LGB discussion in academic and social discourse, the literature
shows that significant problems still remain both within the community and in society as a
whole. These problems are shown to have a significant impact on the psychological well-being
of the population and work against the social, financial, and educational advancement of its
members. While the research regarding these issues is growing, its vital that those in academia
continue to fill the gaps to create a more complete understanding of the issues and build towards
more effective solutions.
Method
To implement this study, a quantitative analysis will be used to survey the influence of
heteronormativity in a small liberal arts university on sense of belonging and stress levels in the
LGB population. A sample will be selected and surveyed using various measures that pertain to
the research variables in order to be analyzed for potential findings. First, to determine if there
are any significant associations between the ratings of heteronormativity impact and sense of
belonging and stress levels within the LGB population. Second, to determine if there is a

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
14

significant correlation between sense of belonging and stress levels in the student population.
Lastly, to determine if high rates of perceived discrimination from a heteronormative society can
be warning signs of adverse sense of belonging and stress levels in LGB college students.
Participants and Sampling
A survey research design will be utilized that incorporates a sample of students enrolled
in undergraduate study at a small private liberal arts university. This will include extended
gender options, primary ethnicity categories, class year, as well as an extended age range.
Because this will be implemented with the undergraduate student body as a whole, it can be
assumed that both heterosexual and LGB individuals may respond. Thus qualifiers will also be
listed for sexual orientation in order to separate the respondents in later data analysis.
Participants will not be individually chosen nor excluded as the survey will be made available to
any undergraduate student with internet access.
Measures
The survey will include pertinent demographic questions followed by three factions of
questionnaires pertaining to the research topic. The three areas of focus pertain to the perception
of discrimination, sense of belonging levels, and stress levels. Each survey is structured as a selfreport survey utilizing likert scale responses.
Perceived Discrimination Instrument. In order to look at the individualized influence of
heteronormativity in the LGB population, relevant subscales were selected from the 96-item
likert scale Gay and Lesbian Oppressive Situations Inventory Frequency and Effect (GALOSIF & -E). The selected subscales were Danger to Safety, Exclusion, Rejection and Separation,
Restricted Opportunities and Rights, Stigmatizing and Stereotyping, and Verbal Harassment and

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
15

Intimidation. The subscales for GALOSI-F range in internal consistency from .63 - .88 and
GALOSI-E subscales held a range from .77 - .93, with neither showing significant correlation to
social desirability responding (Highlen; Bean; & Sampson, 2000). The instrument subscales
contain the most comprehensive and relevant items available that relate to the research topic,
allowing for a detailed representation of the complex interaction of heteronormativity in the LGB
student population.
Sense of Belonging Instrument. To examine the sense of belonging levels in the
participants, a survey measurement will be utilized that analyzes the extent of an individuals
sense of belonging to their environment. The instrument in question is a condensed 27-item likert
scale Sense of Belonging Instrument (SOBI) test developed by Hagerty & Patusky (1995). The
instrument evaluates based on the psychological experience of sense of belonging. It
incorporates both valued involvement and antecedent qualifiers in the items (Hagerty & Patusky,
1995). The expanded 49-item likert scale test has had successful implementation on community
college students with an internal reliability of .93. This also includes a test- retest reliability of .
83 after an 8 week period to control for participation fatigue. (Hagerty & Patusky, 1995)
Undergraduate Student Stress Instrument. In order to look at participants stress levels,
the 10-item likert scale Perceived Stress Survey (PSS) will be used that looks at perceived stress
levels and impact in relation to undergraduate college students (Cohen, 1983). The survey has a
particular focus on the individuals ability to cope with environmental stressors and the
perception they have of being able to handle them. Such aspects are critical components of a
students ability to succeed in an intense academic environment. The study showed an internal
reliability of .85 and a test-retest reliability of .70 (Cohen, 1983).

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
16

Procedures
After receiving Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval the survey will be distributed
to the student bodys university assigned email addresses with a link to an outside, verified, and
reputable survey website containing the compiled demographic and study measurements.
Participation will be voluntary and anonymous and administered during their free time. This will
protect the confidentiality of participants and safety of LGB students. An incentive will be used
to encourage subject participation, in the form an entrance to a randomized raffle for a $50 gift
card. The incentive is designed to encourage participation while being small enough to avoid
skewed data results. The survey is estimated to take approximately 15 minutes for participants to
complete and thus should not take any undue time out of the individuals daily schedules. Any
incomplete surveys will be excluded from the final data analysis.
Data Analysis
Following data collection, analyses will be run through IBM SPSS Statistics software to
look for significant findings in relation to the defined research questions. First, a Pearson
product-moment correlation will be utilized to explore the relationship among sense of belonging
and stress towards ratings of heteronormativity. Second, another Pearson product-moment
correlation will be implemented isolating and comparing the correlation between sense of
belonging and stress variables. This will be done to determine any relationship in the two
variables while controlling for the heteronormative ratings, allowing for closer examination of
their joint interaction. Lastly, path analysis via linear regression will be utilized to determine if a
high rating of perceived heteronormative discrimination can predict low sense of belonging
levels and high stress levels.

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
17

In addition to the responsive analyses, an ANOVA analysis will be run to determine if

significant differences exist between participant demographics (gender, ethnicity, class year, age)
and the focus variables of perceived discrimination, sense of belonging level, and stress level.
This is important for determining if any groups within the LGB student population have varying
mean results in comparison to the overall findings. In accordance to standard usage, the level of
significance in any analyses will be established at p < 0.05. Any relevant and statistically
significant results following these analyses will be discussed pertaining to their relation to the
research study topic.

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
18

References
Bell, D., Binnie, J. (2000). The Sexual Citizen: Queer Politics and Beyond. Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Blount, J. M. (2005). Fit to Teach: Same-Sex Desire, Gender, and School Work in the Twentieth
Century. Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385-396.
Crew, L. (Ed.). (1978). The Gay Academic. Palm Springs, CA: ETC Publications.
Darling, C.A., McWey, L.M., Howard, S.N., Olmstead, S.B. (2007). College student stress: the
influence of interpersonal relationships on sense of coherence. Stress and Health, 23,
215-299.
Elliot, M.N., Kanouse, D.E., Burkhart, Q., Abel, G.A., Lyratzopoulous, G., Beckett, M.K., . . .
Roland, M. (2014). Sexual Minorities in England Have Poorer Health and Worse Health
Care Experiences: A National Survey. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 29(9),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-2941-7.
Fone, B. (2000). HOMOPHOBIA. New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.
Gervais, S. J. (Ed.). (2013). Objectification and (De) Humanization: 60th Nebraska Symposium
on Motivation. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media.
Green, A. I. (2008). Health and Sexual Status in an Urban Gay Enclave: An Application of the
Stress Process Model. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 49(4), 436 451.

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
19

Greenwood, G.L., Gruskin, E.P. (2007). LGBT Tobacco and Alcohol Disparities. In I.H. Meyer
and M.E. Northridge (Eds.). The Health of Sexual Minorities: Public Health
Perspectives of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Populations. New York, NY:
Springer Science + Business Media, LLC.
Hagerty, B. M., & Patusky, K. (1995). Developing a measure of sense of belonging. Nursing
Research, 44, 9 13.
Herek, G., Chopp, R., Strohl, D. (2007). Sexual Stigma: Putting Sexual Minority Health in
Context. In I.H. Meyer and M.E. Northridge (Eds.). The Health of Sexual Minorities:
Public Health Perspectives of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Populations. New
York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media, LLC.
Heteronormative. (2014). In Oxford Dictionaries online. Retrieved from
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/american-english/heteronormative.
Highlen, P., Bean, M., Sampson, M. (2000). Preliminary Development of the Gay and Lesbian
Oppressive Situations Inventory Frequency and Effect (GALOSI F & E). Author.
Kuh, G.D. (2001). Appraising the Character of a College. Journal of Counseling & Development,
71, 661-668.
Mancini, O. (2013). Attrition Risk and Resilience Among Sexual Minority College Students.
Columbia Social Work Review, 2, 8-22.
Meyer, I.H. (2007). Prejudice and Discrimination as Social Stressors. In I.H. Meyer and M.E.
Northridge (Eds.), The Health of Sexual Minorities: Public Health Perspectives of

THE IMPACT OF HETERONORMATIVITY ON SENSE OF BELONGING AND STRESS

LEVELS
20

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Populations (p. 242-267). New York, NY:
Springer Science + Business Media, LLC.
Ostrove, J.M., Stewart, A.J., Curtin, N.L. (2011). Social Class and Belonging: Implications for
Graduate Students Career Aspirations. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(6), 748-774.
Rankin, S.R. (2005). Campus Climates for Sexual Minorities. New Directions for Student
Services, 111, 17-23.
Ripley, M., Anderson, E., McCormack, M., Rockett, B., (2012). Heteronormativity in the
University Classroom: Novelty Attachment and Content Substitution among GayFriendly Students. Sociology of Education, 85(2), 121-130.
Schneider, D.J. (2004). The Psychology of Stereotyping. New York, NY: The Guilford Press
Walling, D. R. (1996). Open Lives Safe Schools: Addressing Gay and Lesbian Issues in
Education. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation
Warren, C. A. B. (1974). Identity and Community in the Gay World. United States: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.