Cargando…

Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey

In 2018, the General Social Survey (GSS) asked some respondents for their sex assigned at birth and current gender identity, in addition to the ongoing practice of having survey interviewers code respondent sex. Between 0.44% and 0.93% of the respondents who were surveyed identified as transgender,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lagos, Danya, Compton, D’Lane
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9084897/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33834217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00703370-8976151
_version_ 1784703700247248896
author Lagos, Danya
Compton, D’Lane
author_facet Lagos, Danya
Compton, D’Lane
author_sort Lagos, Danya
collection PubMed
description In 2018, the General Social Survey (GSS) asked some respondents for their sex assigned at birth and current gender identity, in addition to the ongoing practice of having survey interviewers code respondent sex. Between 0.44% and 0.93% of the respondents who were surveyed identified as transgender, identified with a gender that does not conventionally correspond to the sex they were assigned at birth, or identified the sex they were assigned at birth inconsistently with the interviewer’s assessment of respondent sex. These results corroborate previous estimates of the transgender population size in the United States. Furthermore, the implementation of these new questions mirrors the successful inclusion of other small populations represented in the GSS, such as lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, as well as Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus. Data on transgender and gender-nonconforming populations can be pooled together over time to assess these populations’ attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and social inequality patterns. We identified inconsistencies between interviewer-coded sex, self-reported sex, and gender identity. As with the coding of race in the GSS, interviewer-coded assessments can mismatch respondents’ self-reported identification. Our findings underscore the importance of continuing to ask respondents to self-report gender identity separately from sex assigned at birth in the GSS and other surveys.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9084897
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90848972022-05-09 Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey Lagos, Danya Compton, D’Lane Demography Article In 2018, the General Social Survey (GSS) asked some respondents for their sex assigned at birth and current gender identity, in addition to the ongoing practice of having survey interviewers code respondent sex. Between 0.44% and 0.93% of the respondents who were surveyed identified as transgender, identified with a gender that does not conventionally correspond to the sex they were assigned at birth, or identified the sex they were assigned at birth inconsistently with the interviewer’s assessment of respondent sex. These results corroborate previous estimates of the transgender population size in the United States. Furthermore, the implementation of these new questions mirrors the successful inclusion of other small populations represented in the GSS, such as lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, as well as Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus. Data on transgender and gender-nonconforming populations can be pooled together over time to assess these populations’ attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and social inequality patterns. We identified inconsistencies between interviewer-coded sex, self-reported sex, and gender identity. As with the coding of race in the GSS, interviewer-coded assessments can mismatch respondents’ self-reported identification. Our findings underscore the importance of continuing to ask respondents to self-report gender identity separately from sex assigned at birth in the GSS and other surveys. 2021-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9084897/ /pubmed/33834217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00703370-8976151 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
spellingShingle Article
Lagos, Danya
Compton, D’Lane
Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey
title Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey
title_full Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey
title_fullStr Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey
title_short Evaluating the Use of a Two-Step Gender Identity Measure in the 2018 General Social Survey
title_sort evaluating the use of a two-step gender identity measure in the 2018 general social survey
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9084897/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33834217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00703370-8976151
work_keys_str_mv AT lagosdanya evaluatingtheuseofatwostepgenderidentitymeasureinthe2018generalsocialsurvey
AT comptondlane evaluatingtheuseofatwostepgenderidentitymeasureinthe2018generalsocialsurvey