One method for handling this complexity is always to gather data in states that legitimately acknowledge same-sex partnerships.

26.9.2020 Zařazen do: Nezařazené — webmaster @ 20.51

Last methods have actually included dealing with community lovers ( e.g., neighborhood lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender advocacy teams) to simply help scientists establish trust and possibilities for recruitment, in specific whenever recruiting more targeted samples centered on race/ethnicity or socioeconomic status (e.g., Meyer & Wilson, 2009; Moore, 2008). Scientists can also benefit from details about the geographical circulation of same-sex partners in the us to get information in areas with greater levels of same-sex partners and racial/ethnic and socioeconomic variety (Black et al., 2000; Gates, 2010). On the web recruitment could also facilitate research involvement; greater privacy and simplicity of involvement with web surveys when compared with data that are face-to-face may raise the likelihood that folks in same-sex unions and same-sex partners will be involved in studies (Meyer & Wilson, 2009; Riggle, Rostosky, & Reedy, 2005).

Comparison Group Challenges

Decisions in regards to the meaning and structure of contrast teams in studies that compare same-sex relationships to relationships that are different-sex critical because same-sex partners are demographically distinct from different-sex partners; people in same-sex partners are more youthful, more educated, more prone to be used, less likely to want to have young ones, and somewhat more prone to be female than individuals in different-sex couples (Gates, 2013b). As an example, scientists may mistakenly conclude that relationship characteristics vary for exact same- and different-sex partners if it is in reality status that is parental between exact exact same- and different-sex partners that shape relationship characteristics. Three certain contrast team factors that creates unique challenges—and opportunities—for research on same-sex relationships include (a) a moving appropriate landscape, (b) parental status, and (c) unpartnered people.

Moving appropriate landscape

As appropriate choices have actually expanded for same-sex partners, more research reports have contrasted individuals in same-sex marriages and civil unions (or registered domestic partnerships) with individuals in different-sex married partnerships ( ag e.g., Solomon et al., 2004). Yet because appropriate choices differ across states and as time passes, the exact same statuses aren’t accessible to all couples that are same-sex. This moving landscape that is legal significant challenges, in specific for scholars whom make an effort to compare same-sex partners with different-sex couples, since most same-sex couples never have hitched (if not had the option of marrying), whereas many different-sex partners have experienced sufficient possibility to marry.

One method for handling this complexity is always to gather information in states that lawfully acknowledge same-sex partnerships. For instance, Rothblum and peers (Rothblum et al., 2011a; Solomon et al., 2004) contacted all couples whom joined civil unions in Vermont in 2000–2001, and same-sex partners whom consented to engage then selected their siblings in a choice of different-sex marriages or noncivil union same-sex relationships for participation when you look at the study. This design, which may be adjusted for qualitative or quantitative studies, permitted the researchers to compare three kinds of couples and target possibly confounding factors ( e.g., cohort, socioeconomic status, social support systems) by matching same-sex partners in civil unions with community people who had been comparable on these back ground variables. Gates and Badgett (2006) argued that future research comparing various appropriate statuses and appropriate contexts across states may help us better know very well what is possibly unique about wedding ( e.g., whether you will find health advantages connected with same-sex wedding when compared with same-sex cohabitation).

A relevant challenge is the fact that same-sex partners in appropriate unions might have cohabited for quite some time but held it’s place in a appropriate union for a short while because appropriate union status became available just recently. This limitations research to the implications of same-sex wedding considering the fact that wedding is conflated with relationship length. One technique for working with this really is to complement exact exact same- and different-sex partners in the same appropriate status (e.g., wedding) on total relationship length as opposed to the period of time inside their present status ( e.g., cohabiting, hitched, or other appropriate status; Umberson et al., in press). use a weblink A additional problem is the fact that historical alterations in appropriate alternatives for individuals in same-sex relationships donate to various relationship records across successive delivery cohorts, a concern we address later on, within our conversation of relationship biography and directions for future research. Future studies may additionally think about whether usage of appropriate wedding influences the security and timeframe of same-sex relationships, maybe making use of quasi-experimental practices (also discussed below).

Parental status and kinship systems

People in same-sex relationships are nested within bigger kinship systems, in specific those who include kiddies and parents, and household characteristics may diverge from habits discovered for individuals in different-sex relationships (Ocobock, 2013; Patterson, 2000; Reczek, 2014). Those in same-sex relationships experience more strain and less contact with their families of origin (Rothblum, 2009) for example, some studies suggest that, compared with individuals in different-sex relationships. Wedding holds great symbolic importance that may change exactly how other people, including family relations, view and connect to people in same-sex unions (Badgett, 2009). Last studies have shown that individuals in different-sex marriages are far more involved in their loved ones of origin than are the ones in different-sex cohabiting unions. Future research should further explore how a change from cohabitation to marriage alters relationships along with other family unit members (including relationships with categories of beginning) for the people in same-sex unions (Ocobock, 2013).

Sdílejte tento článek pomocí:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Žádné komentáře »

Zatím nemáte žádné komentáře.

Napsat komentář

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wordpress themes

Facebook na Facebooku


Code: | Design: Bombajs - w3cxhtml 1.1 w3ccss

Tento web je provozován s využitím systému WordPress. (Česká lokalizace)