Examining Narratives of Subjective Social Status Among Diverse Youth with LGBTQ+ Parent

• In Event: Understandings of Subjective Social Status and Predictors of Educational Achievement among Youth

Abstract

Although measures of socioeconomic status (SES) are useful in assessing social status and related population health outcomes, literature indicates that subjective social status (SSS), or one’s perceived social ranking compared to others (Adler, 2000), may be another important facet to consider (Moreno-Maldonado, 2019). Exploring youths’ ranking and explanation for their SSS could help researchers capture a broader understanding of the relationship between social status and individuals’ lived experiences (Jury, 2017). This relationship is particularly important to investigate among underserved populations such as those diverse in racial-ethnic (Brown et al., 2008), sexual, or gender identities (Stone, 2018), as SSS is linked with significant health outcomes (Rivenbark et al., 2019). Thus, the current study is a qualitative examination of SSS among a sample of diverse youth with LGBTQ+ parents. By examining this population, we hope to develop a better understanding of how SSS intersects with unique identities, like familial identities, and thus inform further research on how to better support diverse youth.
Participants were 50 youth (ages 12-25 years) with at least one LGBTQ+ parent (see Table 1 for demographics). Substantial diversity characterized our sample in race, gender, sexual identity, and geography. Remote semi-structured interviews were conducted by the second author, asking participants to describe their experiences being part of an LGBTQ+ parent family, including their SSS. Data were collected between December 2018 and February 2020.
To assess SSS, participants were read the MacArthur Ladder of Subjective Social Status (Adler et al., 2000). Interviewees rated themselves on a ladder compared to the “typical” American (1-10 scale) and then were prompted to explain their choice, resulting in a quantitative ranking and open-ended response. The first two authors coded transcribed interview data from the open-ended responses for emerging themes through an inductive approach. Following, the coders engaged in complete coding (Braun & Clarke, 2006; 2013) regarding the presence of themes and met to resolve disagreements until reaching consensus. Coders showed moderate to perfect interrater reliability (McHugh, 2012).
Data saturation has been reached and analyses investigating associations between themes and quantitative rankings of SSS are ongoing. We uncovered five themes surrounding the factors that participants described in considering their SSS (see Table 2 for examples). Theme 1 (objective indicators of SES) represented participants’ consideration of explicit SES determinants (e.g., parent occupation). Theme 2 (behaviors of class status) represented behaviors associated with SES such as purchasing equipment for extracurriculars. Theme 3 (unexpected crises) represented moments in participants’ lives in which an event suddenly altered their SES. Theme 4 (fluid understanding of SSS) represented participants who were aware that their SSS was context-dependent (e.g., living in multiple households with different rankings). Theme 5 (class socialization) represented the use of master (as opposed to alternative) narratives developed from societal understandings of SSS instead of content specific to participants’ lives. This qualitative analysis has implications for our understanding of how identity and SSS intersect with the social development of youth. Mainly, it may enlighten us as to how LGBTQ+ familial identity relates to youth’s perceptions of SSS.

Authors

• Madi T Diomede, University of Kentucky
  Presenting Author

• Kay Simon, University of Kentucky
  Non-Presenting Author

• Rachel H. Farr, University of Kentucky
  Non-Presenting Author