While most literature on LGBTQ+ college students has focused on the negative climates and environments these students experience, the National Study of LGBTQ+ Students uses asset-based framing to explore the ways that LGBTQ+ college students succeed and thrive. To measure how LGBTQ+ students thrive, we include variety of pre-existing, external instruments to measure collegiate outcomes. These measures have been tested and validated in prior studies, thus bolstering their inclusion in our study.
Below, we list the external scales used in the National Study of LGBTQ+ Students. We provide a summary of each outcome scale, along with a link to more information.
The Thriving Quotient (TQ)
The Thriving Quotient is a 24-item scale, developed by Laurie Schreiner, that measures the academic, social, and psychological aspects of undergraduate students’ college experience that are most predictive of academic success, institutional fit, satisfaction with college, and graduation. The items cluster into five subscales: Engaged Learning (α = 0.87), Academic Determination (α = 0.84), Positive Perspective (α = 0.78), Social Connectedness (α = 0.83), and Diverse Citizenship (α = 0.79).
Schreiner, L. A. (2013). Thriving in college. New Directions for Student Services, 143, 41-52.
Need for Cognition (NCS)
The Need for Cognition Scale is an 18-item scale, developed by John Cacioppo, Richard E. Petty, and Chuan Feng Kao, that measures an individual’s tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities. This instrument was used in the Wabash National Study of Liberal Arts Education, due to the linkage between these traits and skills and academic achievement (Sadowski & Gulgoz, 1996).
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307.
Sadowski, C. J., & Gulgoz, S. (1996). Elaborative processing mediates the relationship between need for cognition and academic performance. The Journal of Psychology, 130, 303–307.
Miville-Guzmann Universality-Diversity Scale – Short Form (M-GUDS-S)
The Miville-Guzmann Universality-Diversity Scale – Short Form is a 15-item scale, developed by Marie L. Miville, that measures a person’s universal-diverse orientation. This concept is defined by Miville (1999) as “an attitude of awareness and acceptance of both similarities and differences that exist among people” (p. 294). This scale is the shorted version of a longer, 45-item scale, and contains three subscales: Diversity of Contact (interest in and commitment to participating in diverse, intentionally focused social and cultural activities), Relativistic Appreciation (appreciation of both similarities and differences in people and the impact of these in one’s understanding and personal growth), and Comfort with Differences (the degree of comfort with diverse individuals). This scale was also used in the Wabash National Study of Liberal Arts Education.
Fuertes, J. N., Miville, M. L., Mohr, J. J., Sedlacek, W. E., & Gretchen, D. (2000). Factor structure and short form of the Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 157–169.
Miville, M. L., Gelso, C. J., Pannu, R., Liu, W., Touradji, P., Holloway, P., & Fuertes, J. (1999). Appreciating similarities and valuing differences: The Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46(3), 291–307.
Flourishing Scale (FS)
The Flourishing Scale is an 8-item scale, created by Ed Diener and colleagues (2010), to measure a person’s self-perceived success in relationships, self-esteem, purpose, and optimism. The FS does not measure psychological well-being, but instead encompasses positive functioning across several important domains.
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156.