The interpersonal and mental health implications of the coherence of coming out narratives for a sample of gay men in committed romantic relationships

The coming out process has been conceptualized as a developmental imperative for those who will eventually accept their same-sex attractions. It is widely accepted that homophobia, heterosexism, and homonegativity are cultural realities that may complicate this developmental process for gay men. The current study views coming out as an extra-developmental life task that is at best a stressful event, and at worst traumatic when coming out results in the rupture of salient relationships with parents, siblings, and/or close friends. To date, the minority stress model (Meyer, 1995; 2003) has been utilized as an organizing framework for how to empirically examine external stressors and mental health disparities for lesbians, gay men, and bisexual individuals in the United States. The current study builds on this literature by focusing on the influence of how gay men make sense of and represent the coming out process in a semi-structured interview, more specifically, by examining the legacy of the coming out process on indicators of wellness. In a two-part process, this study first employs the framework well articulated in the adult attachment literature of coherence of narratives to explore both variation and implications of the coming out experience for a sample of gay men (n = 60) in romantic relationships (n = 30). In particular, this study employed constructs identified in the adult attachment literature, namely Preoccupied and Dismissing current state of mind, to code a Coming Out Interview (COI). In the present study current state of mind refers to the degree of coherent discourse produced about coming out experiences as relayed during the COI. Multilevel analyses tested the extent to which these COI dimensions, as revealed through an analysis of coming out narratives in the COI, were associated with relationship quality, including self-reported satisfaction and observed emotional tone in a standard laboratory interaction task and self-reported symptoms of psychopathology. In addition, multilevel analyses also assessed the Acceptance by primary relationship figures at the time of disclosure, as well as the degree of Outness at the time of the study. Results revealed that participant’s narratives on the COI varied with regard to Preoccupied and Dismissing current state of mind, suggesting that the AAI coding system provides a viable organizing framework for extracting meaning from coming out narratives as related to attachment relevant constructs. Multilevel modeling revealed construct validity of the attachment dimensions assessed via the COI; attachment (i.e., Preoccupied and Dismissing current state of mind) as assessed via the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) was significantly correlated with the corresponding COI variables. These finding suggest both methodological and conceptual convergence between these two measures. However, with one exception, COI Preoccupied and Dismissing current state of mind did not predict relationship outcomes or self-reported internalizing and externalizing symptoms. However, further analyses revealed that the degree to which one is out to others moderated the relationship between COI Preoccupied and internalizing. Specifically, for those who were less out to others, there was a significant and positive relationship between Preoccupied current state of mind towards coming out and internalizing symptoms. In addition, the degree of perceived acceptance of sexual orientation by salient relationship figures at the time of disclosure emerged as a predictor of mental health. In particular, Acceptance was significantly negatively related to internalizing symptoms. Overall, the results offer preliminary support that gay men’s narratives do reflect variation as assessed by attachment dimensions and highlights the role of Acceptance by salient relationship figures at the time of disclosure. Still, for the most part, current state of mind towards coming out in this study was not associated with relationship quality and self-reported indicators of mental health. This finding may be a function of low statistical power given the modest sample size. However, the relationship between Preoccupied current state of mind and mental health (i.e., internalizing) appears to depend on degree of Outness. In addition, the response of primary relationships figures to coming out may be a relevant factor in shaping mental health outcomes for gay men. Limitations and suggestions for future research and clinical intervention are offered.

Formalizing operator task analysis

Human operators are unique in their decision making capability, judgment and nondeterminism. Their sense of judgment, unpredictable decision procedures, susceptibility to environmental elements can cause them to erroneously execute a given task description to operate a computer system. Usually, a computer system is protected against some erroneous human behaviors by having necessary safeguard mechanisms in place. But some erroneous human operator behaviors can lead to severe or even fatal consequences especially in safety critical systems. A generalized methodology that can allow modeling and analyzing the interactions between computer systems and human operators where the operators are allowed to deviate from their prescribed behaviors will provide a formal understanding of the robustness of a computer system against possible aberrant behaviors by its human operators. We provide several methodology for assisting in modeling and analyzing human behaviors exhibited while operating computer systems. Every human operator is usually given a specific recommended set of guidelines for operating a system. We first present process algebraic methodology for modeling and verifying recommended human task execution behavior. We present how one can perform runtime monitoring of a computer system being operated by a human operator for checking violation of temporal safety properties. We consider the concept of a protection envelope giving a wider class of behaviors than those strictly prescribed by a human task that can be tolerated by a system. We then provide a framework for determining whether a computer system can maintain its guarantees if the human operators operate within their protection envelopes. This framework also helps to determine the robustness of the computer system under weakening of the protection envelopes. In this regard, we present a tool called Tutela that assists in implementing the framework. We then examine the ability of a system to remain safe under broad classes of variations of the prescribed human task. We develop a framework for addressing two issues. The first issue is: given a human task specification and a protection envelope, will the protection envelope properties still hold under standard erroneous executions of that task by the human operators? In other words how robust is the protection envelope? The second issue is: in the absence of a protection envelope, can we approximate a protection envelope encompassing those standard erroneous human behaviors that can be safely endured by the system? We present an extension of Tutela that implements this framework. The two frameworks mentioned above use Concurrent Game Structures (CGS) as models for both computer systems and their human operators. However, there are some shortcomings of this formalism for our uses. We add incomplete information concepts in CGSs to achieve better modularity for the players. We introduce nondeterminism in both the transition system and strategies of players and in the modeling of human operators and computer systems. Nondeterministic action strategies for players in \emph{i}ncomplete information \emph{N}ondeterministic CGS (iNCGS) is a more precise formalism for modeling human behaviors exhibited while operating a computer system. We show how we can reason about a human behavior satisfying a guarantee by providing a semantics of Alternating Time Temporal Logic based on iNCGS player strategies. In a nutshell this dissertation provides formal methodology for modeling and analyzing system robustness against both expected and erroneous human operator behaviors.

From the human rights-based approach to an ecological approach on how to achieve successful inclusion in international disability education

The barriers that people with disabilities face around the world are not only inherent to the limitations resulting from the disability itself, but, more importantly, these barriers rest with the societal technologies of exclusion. Using a mixed methodology approach, I conduct a quest to revealing several societal factors that limit full participation of people with disabilities in their communities, which will contribute to understanding and developing a more comprehensive framework for full inclusion of people with disabilities into the society. First, I conduct a multiple regression analysis to seek whether there is a statistical relationship between the national level of development, the level of democratization, and the level of education within a country’s population on one hand, and expressed concern for and preparedness to improve the quality of life for people of disabilities on another hand. The results from the quantitative methodology reveal that people without disabilities are more prepared to take care of people with disabilities when the level of development of the country is higher, when the people have more freedom of expression and hold the government accountable for its actions, and when the level of corruption is under control. However, a greater concern for the well-being of people with disabilities is correlated with a high level of country development, a decreased value of political stability and absence of violence, a decreased level of government effectiveness, and a greater level of law enforcement. None of the dependent variables are significantly correlated with the level of education from a given country. Then, I delve into an interpretive analysis to understand multiple factors that contribute to the construction of attitudes and practices towards people with disabilities. In doing this, I build upon the four main principles outlined by the United Nations as strongly recommended to be embedded in all international programmes: (1) identification of claims of human rights and the corresponding obligations of governments, hence, I assess and analyze disability rights in education, looking at United Nation, United States, and European Union Perspectives Educational Rights Provisions for People with Disabilities (Ch. 3); (2) estimated capacity of individuals to claim their rights and of governments to fulfill their obligations, hence, I look at the people with disabilities as rights-holders and duty-bearers and discuss the importance of investing in special capital in the context of global development (Ch. 4); (3) programmes monitor and evaluate the outcomes and the processes under the auspices of human rights standards, hence, I look at the importance of evaluating the UN World Programme of Action Concerning People with Disabilities from multiple perspectives, as an example of why and how to monitor and evaluate educational human rights outcomes and processes (Ch. 5); and (4) programming should reflect the recommendations of international human rights bodies and mechanisms, hence, I focus on programming that fosters development of the capacity of people with disabilities, that is, planning for an ecology of disabilities and ecoducation for people with disabilities (Ch. 6). Results from both methodologies converge to a certain point, and they further complement each other. One common result for the two methodologies employed is that disability is an evolving concept when viewed in a broader context, which integrates the four spaces that the ecological framework incorporates. Another common result is that factors such as economic, social, legal, political, and natural resources and contexts contribute to the health, education and employment opportunities, and to the overall well-being of people with disabilities. The ecological framework sees all these factors from a meta-systemic perspective, where bi-directional interactions are expected and desired, and also from a human rights point of view, where the inherent value of people is upheld at its highest standard.