History & Purpose

In 2002, Worthington, Savoy, Dillon, & Vernaglia

published an article detailing Heterosexual Identity
Development: A Multidimensional Model of Individual
and Social Identity. Historically, there was a gap in the
research literature regarding the identity development of
those in majority groups, specifically those who identify
as heterosexual. Furthermore, the central weakness of
the existing literature is the primary focus on sexual
orientation as the sole component of sexual
identity (Worthington et al., 2002, p. 501). This model
was developed to combat existing limitations in the
current research regarding sexual identity development.

Major Findings & Significance

Worthington et al. (2005)
Relationships between positive attitudes
towards LGB people and the extent to
which individuals had explored their
sexual identity.
Dillon et al. (2008)
Positive correlation between counselors
who reported sexual identity exploration
and their level of confidence regarding
ability to work effectively with LGB clients
If higher ed practitioners can facilitate
students heterosexual identity
development, we can help them develop
positive attitudes and relationships with
those who identify differently.

Overview of Model
Most comprehensive model to date (Evans et al., 2010)
Focus on psychological and social aspects of identity
Informed by stages in Marcias (1980) Identity Development Model
Factors: 1) biology 2) microsocial context 3) gender norms 4) culture 5) religious
llllllorientation 6) systemic homonegativity, sexual prejudice, privilege
Five Developmental Statuses not sequential, not rigid, can be repeated
1) Unexplored Commitment
2) Active Exploration
3) Diffusion
4) Deepening and Commitment
5) Synthesis

Measuring Development

Benefits & Limitations

In order to understand where an individual is

in their heterosexual identity development,
one must pay attention to things said in
conversation, and how the individual acts
within daily life (ex. do they conform to
gender norms or cultural expectations?)

Encourages further research

Helps us to understand development
of individuals in the majority group
Provides an opportunity to challenge
others to think about their privileged
identities

Worthington and other colleagues later

developed two instruments to measure
heterosexual identity development.
LGB-KASH (measures attitudes)
MoSIEC (measures development)

No plus-one staging
Lack of adequate validation (such as
longitudinal studies that support the
effectiveness and validity of the
model.)

Implications & Future Research

Given that the development of this
model is fairly recent, there is a clear
need for further research. Research
topics include:
1) Intersectionality of sexual
identity and other social
identities
2) Sociocultural influences
3) Development of an integrated
model that eliminates the
dichotomization of sexual
identity
In regards to Residence Life, there is
room to research how sexual identity
development occurs in both samegender and co-ed residence hall
communities. It could be useful to
study what factors of a residence hall
community facilitate or hinder
heterosexual identity development.

Conclusion
References
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F., Patton, L., & Renn, K. (2010). Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd Edition). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Worthington, R. L., & Mohr, J. J. (2002). Theorizing heterosexual identity development.
The Counseling Psychologist.
Worthington, R. L., Savoy, H. B., Dillon, F. R., & Vernaglia, E. R. (2002). Heterosexual
Identity Development A Multidimensional Model of Individual and Social Identity.
The Counseling Psychologist, 30(4), 496-531.

I chose this theory because I identify as heterosexual, but I find more salience in other identities. I was excited to learn more about my own
development, and knew that studying this theory would challenge me to reflect on how I understand my heterosexual identity as an individual,
and as part of a privileged group. A fun fact about the theorists is that all four of them have some sort of tie to Boston College. An aha
moment occurred when I was reading about the purpose of the model. I suddenly realized that it is true that there are very few theories that
have focused on the identity development of those in the majority groups. Many of the theories that we have focused on in class relate to the
development of those in the minority groups. My positionality as a heterosexual woman of color helps me relate to the theory and understand
how it applies to my own life and others like me. My identities allow me to be able to apply the theory through a lens of personal experience.