The purpose of this study was to research gender, affectional/sexual orientation, and sex roles to determine how people respond to the Expanded Reasons for Living Scale by Linehan, Goodstein, Nielsen, and Chiles (1983). This study used the Bem Sex Role Inventory, short form (Bem, 1981) to assess androgynous and nonandrogynous people.
Results from the statistical analysis revealed that bisexuals had the lowest reasons for living score followed by gay men/lesbians, and then heterosexuals on the Total RFL, as well as on the Responsiblility to Family and Moral Objections subscales. On the Child-Related Concerns subscale heterosexuals had a higher RFL score than both homosexuals and bisexuals. The Fear of Social Disapproval subscale revealed that heterosexuals and homosexuals were significantly higher than bisexuals. Androgynous people had a higher RFL on the Moral Objections subscale than nonandrogynous people and Androgynous women scored higher than nonandrogynous women on the Survival and Coping Belief subscale.
","abstract_html":"<p>The purpose of this study was to research gender, affectional/sexual orientation, and sex roles to determine how people respond to the Expanded Reasons for Living Scale by Linehan, Goodstein, Nielsen, and Chiles (1983). This study used the Bem Sex Role Inventory, short form (Bem, 1981) to assess androgynous and nonandrogynous people.</p> <p>Results from the statistical analysis revealed that bisexuals had the lowest reasons for living score followed by gay men/lesbians, and then heterosexuals on the Total RFL, as well as on the Responsiblility to Family and Moral Objections subscales. On the Child-Related Concerns subscale heterosexuals had a higher RFL score than both homosexuals and bisexuals. The Fear of Social Disapproval subscale revealed that heterosexuals and homosexuals were significantly higher than bisexuals. Androgynous people had a higher RFL on the Moral Objections subscale than nonandrogynous people and Androgynous women scored higher than nonandrogynous women on the Survival and Coping Belief subscale.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Hamilton, Shana Valere"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"MA (Master of Arts)","degree_level":"Thesis - unrestricted","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2001,"date_issued":"2001-08-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2001-08-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:19:07Z","subjects":["Homosexuality","Reasons for Living","Bisexuality","Sexual Orientation","Gender","Sex Roles","Androgyny","Affectional Orientation","Psychology","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":["Copyright by the authors."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/143","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Hamilton, Shana Valere"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["1900-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2001-08-01T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis - unrestricted"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["MA (Master of Arts)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Homosexuality","Reasons for Living","Bisexuality","Sexual Orientation","Gender","Sex Roles","Androgyny","Affectional Orientation","Psychology","Social and Behavioral Sciences"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright by the authors."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://dc.etsu.edu/context/etd/article/1193/viewcontent/hamiltonss0720a.pdf","https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/143"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purpose of this study was to research gender, affectional/sexual orientation, and sex roles to determine how people respond to the Expanded Reasons for Living Scale by Linehan, Goodstein, Nielsen, and Chiles (1983). This study used the Bem Sex Role Inventory, short form (Bem, 1981) to assess androgynous and nonandrogynous people.
Results from the statistical analysis revealed that bisexuals had the lowest reasons for living score followed by gay men/lesbians, and then heterosexuals on the Total RFL, as well as on the Responsiblility to Family and Moral Objections subscales. On the Child-Related Concerns subscale heterosexuals had a higher RFL score than both homosexuals and bisexuals. The Fear of Social Disapproval subscale revealed that heterosexuals and homosexuals were significantly higher than bisexuals. Androgynous people had a higher RFL on the Moral Objections subscale than nonandrogynous people and Androgynous women scored higher than nonandrogynous women on the Survival and Coping Belief subscale.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Affectional Orientation, Sex Roles, and Reasons for Living."]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Hamilton, Shana Valere"],"dc:date.available":["1900-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2001-08-01T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purpose of this study was to research gender, affectional/sexual orientation, and sex roles to determine how people respond to the Expanded Reasons for Living Scale by Linehan, Goodstein, Nielsen, and Chiles (1983). This study used the Bem Sex Role Inventory, short form (Bem, 1981) to assess androgynous and nonandrogynous people.
Results from the statistical analysis revealed that bisexuals had the lowest reasons for living score followed by gay men/lesbians, and then heterosexuals on the Total RFL, as well as on the Responsiblility to Family and Moral Objections subscales. On the Child-Related Concerns subscale heterosexuals had a higher RFL score than both homosexuals and bisexuals. The Fear of Social Disapproval subscale revealed that heterosexuals and homosexuals were significantly higher than bisexuals. Androgynous people had a higher RFL on the Moral Objections subscale than nonandrogynous people and Androgynous women scored higher than nonandrogynous women on the Survival and Coping Belief subscale.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://dc.etsu.edu/context/etd/article/1193/viewcontent/hamiltonss0720a.pdf","https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/143"],"dc:rights":["Copyright by the authors."],"dc:subject":["Homosexuality","Reasons for Living","Bisexuality","Sexual Orientation","Gender","Sex Roles","Androgyny","Affectional Orientation","Psychology","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"dc:title":["Affectional Orientation, Sex Roles, and Reasons for Living."],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis - unrestricted"],"thesis:degree_name":["MA (Master of Arts)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:19:07Z"}