Who Are We Studying When We Study Sexual Minorities? A Demographic Portrait by Partnership and Sexual Identity in Sweden

<p dir="ltr">This study estimated the size and sociodemographic composition of sexual orientation subpopulations to compare the implications of different measurement strategies. Studies define and measure sexual minority status differently, resulting in sometimes starkly different research conclusions depending on whether self-reported identities, same-sex partnership, or same-sex formal union status are used. For example, family research on same-sex couples and children of same-sex parents identifies several advantages, but health research finds substantial mental health disparities for self-identified sexual minorities (i.e., LGBQ+) compared to heterosexuals. Small sample sizes typically complicate generalizable comparisons. We analyzed the nationally representative Swedish National Public Health Survey (2018-2022; https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/the-public-health-agency-of-sweden/public-health-reporting/; N=319,507). Sexual identity reports were combined with administrative register data on formal unions to compare marriage, partnership, and cohabitation among those self-identified as lesbian/gay, bisexual, and heterosexual. Marriage, cohabitation, and parenting were less common among self-identified sexual minorities. Gay/lesbian married respondents were sociodemographically selected compared to other sexual minorities, especially non-partnered and bisexual-identified persons. Further, prevalence and sociodemographic selection differed substantially by age cohort. Married gay/lesbian-identified people, including parents, are rare and highly advantaged (e.g., socioeconomically) compared to all self-identified LGB respondents. Therefore, studies using different operationalizations of sexual minority status are examining groups that differ in meaningful ways. It is critical that researchers not generalize findings drawn from one operationalization of sexual minorities to another.</p>