Methodological and Content Review of Lesbian-, Gay-, and Bisexual-Related Articles in Counseling Journals: 1990-1999

TLDR

The counseling literature has seen reduced overt heterosexist bias, yet questions remain about the content and methodology of LGB articles within the sociopolitical context of American psychology. The study aims to conduct a content and methodological analysis of 119 LGB‑related articles published in eight major counseling journals from 1990‑1999, extending past reviews by examining bisexuality issues. The authors performed a systematic review of these articles, analyzing their content and methodology. The review found growing integration and methodological improvements in LGB counseling research, but highlighted gaps in theory‑based studies, instrument development, and attention to within‑group differences such as bisexuality and LGB people of color.

Abstract

Despite the reduction of overt heterosexist biases in the psychological literature, questions exist about the content and methodology of articles on lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) issues in the counseling literature. This study provides a content and methodological analysis of 119 LGB-related articles that were published in eight major counseling journals from 1990-1999 and extends past reviews by examining issues related to bisexuality. Increasing integration of LGB issues in the counseling literature was apparent, as were methodological improvements in empirical research. Various limitations also emerged, such as the need for more theory-based research, instrument development, and attention to within-group differences (e.g., bisexual people and LGB people of color). Findings are discussed against the backdrop of the sociopolitical context of American psychology, with an emphasis on implications for future LGB-related research, practice, and training.