(PS1-B43) The Impact of Invalidation Following Social Rejection on Risk Taking Propensity in Gay Men

Gay men are at heightened risk of engaging in maladaptive and risky behaviors (Dudley et al., 2004 Hatzenbuehler et al., 2009). Yet, few studies speak to the contexts where these behaviors are more likely to occur. The minority stress model suggests that maladaptive behaviors among gay men result from chronic identity-related stress (e.g., discrimination, invalidation; Cardona et al., 2021; Meyer, 2003). Indeed, discrimination and social rejection have been linked to greater risk-taking and are common among gay men (Jamieson et al., 2012; Pachankis et al., 2015). Literature suggests that invalidation of minority stress experiences may contribute to increased maladaptive behavior (Shenk et al., 2011; Herr et al., 2017). However, no research has examined the combined impact of discrimination, social rejection, and invalidation on risk-taking in this population. Thus, this study examined the impact of lifetime discrimination experiences and invalidation after social rejection on risk-taking in gay men. We hypothesized that invalidated (vs. validated) participants would exhibit higher risk-taking after social rejection and that this relationship would be stronger at high discrimination experiences. Data collection is ongoing. Forty more participants will be recruited. Thus, results are preliminary. Participants were 54 adult gay males (mean age = 39) recruited from the community and online. Participants completed a measure of lifetime discrimination (Williams et al., 1997). Participants then engaged in a sham group chat with another “participant” (bot with predetermined answers). Each participant (1) completed an ‘about me’ form (e.g., hobbies, sexual orientation, job, etc.), (2) was assigned to a “partner” and asked to review their partner’s ‘about me’ form and (3) predicted their partner’s responses to a list of questions. Afterwards, they received negative replies exhibiting prejudice against their sexual orientation. Participants then spoke to a moderator who asked for their feedback on the task. Participants were randomly assigned to receive validating or invalidating responses. Participants then completed the Balloon Analogue Risk Task, a measure of risk-taking propensity (Lejuez et al., 2002). Given our small sample size and preliminary nature of analyses, an interaction effect at p < .10 was explored. Results showed a significant negative association of lifetime discrimination with risk-taking (b=-2.28, p=.04). The condition by discrimination interaction had a p value of .09 (b=1.24). Examination of simple slopes showed a significant association between validation (vs. invalidation) and risk-taking only at high discrimination (b=12.59, p=.04). Specifically, risk-taking was stable across all discrimination levels for participants in the validation condition. Risk-taking reduced among participants in the invalidation condition as discrimination levels increased. Contrary to expectations, participants who were invalidated (vs. validated) after social rejection exhibited lower risk-taking in the context of high lifetime discrimination. Preliminary results suggest that chronic discrimination and invalidation may contribute to risk aversion and decreased pursuit of positive reinforcement.