LGBT Moral Injury Scale: Initial Validation and Preliminary Psychometric Properties
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24016/2026.v12.519Keywords:
moral injury, LGBTQ, minority stress, psychometrics, spiritual struggles, validityAbstract
Background: Moral injury has been linked to guilt, shame, self-condemnation, and moral disorientation; however, existing measures have been developed primarily in military, veteran, or healthcare contexts and may not adequately capture identity-related moral suffering in LGBTQ+ populations.
Objective: To develop the LGBT Moral Injury Scale (LGBT-MIS) and provide initial psychometric evidence for its use with LGBTQ+ adults in Puerto Rico.
Method: A total of 242 LGBTQ+ adults were recruited through social media and snowball sampling. Because multivariate normality was violated, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses using robust estimation to compare a unidimensional model, a theory-driven five-factor model, and refined alternative models. We evaluated global model fit, factor loadings, item discrimination, internal consistency (α, ω, and composite reliability), convergent validity (AVE), discriminant validity (ASV, MSV), interfactor correlations, and external convergent associations with PTSD symptoms and Negative Religious Coping.
Results: The unidimensional model showed poor fit, whereas the theory-driven model demonstrated mixed fit and several loadings below .65. After item refinement, a 15-item, five-factor solution—Guilt, Shame, Moral Conflicts, Religious Struggle, and Self-Condemnation—showed adequate fit, satisfactory reliability, and acceptable item discrimination. AVE supported convergent validity, and ASV supported discriminant validity; however, MSV exceeded AVE for Guilt, Shame, and Moral Conflicts, indicating partial overlap among these factors. Interfactor correlations were positive and moderate. Associations with PTSD symptoms and Negative Religious Coping provided initial evidence of external convergent validity.
Conclusions: The LGBT-MIS provides promising initial support as a multidimensional measure of moral injury in Puerto Rican LGBTQ+ adults. With further validation, the scale may support research and clinically informed assessment of guilt, shame, moral conflict, religious struggle, and self-condemnation in LGBTQ+ populations.
Downloads
References
Ato, M., López‑García, J. J. L., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología [A classification system for research designs in psychology]. Anales de Psicología, 29(3), 1038–1059. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511
Blevins, C. A., Weathers, F. W., Davis, M. T., Witte, T. K., & Domino, J. L. (2015). The Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5): Development and initial psychometric evaluation. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 28(6), 489–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22059
Bohren, M. A., Vazquez Corona, M., Odiase, O. J., Wilson, A. N., Sudhinaraset, M., Diamond-Smith, N., Berryman, J., Tunçalp, Ö., & Afulani, P. A. (2022). Strategies to reduce stigma and discrimination in sexual and reproductive healthcare settings: A mixed‑methods systematic review. PLOS Global Public Health, 2(7), e0000582. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000582
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Bryan, C. J., Bryan, A. O., Anestis, M. D., Anestis, J. C., Green, B. A., Etienne, N., Morrow, C. E., & Ray-Sannerud, B. (2016). Measuring moral injury: Psychometric properties of the Moral Injury Events Scale in two military samples. Assessment, 23(5), 557-570. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115590855
Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2002). Model selection and multimodel inference: A practical information-theoretic approach (2nd ed.). Springer.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Psychology Press.
Champion, D. J. (1981). Basic statistics for social research (2nd ed.). MacMillan.
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Currier, J. M., Foster, J. D., Witvliet, C. V., Abernethy, A. D., Root Luna, L. M., Schnitker, S. A., VanHarn, K., & Carter, J. (2019). Spiritual struggles and mental health outcomes in a spiritually integrated inpatient program. Journal of Affective Disorders, 249, 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.02.012
Currier, J. M., Isaak, S. L., & McDermott, R. C. (2020). Validation of the Expressions of Moral Injury Scale—Military Version—Short Form. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 27(1), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2407
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th Ed). Sage Publications.
Doornik, J. A., & Hansen, H. (2008). An omnibus test for univariate and multivariate normality. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 70(5), 927–939. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2008.00537.x
Exline, J. J., Pargament, K. I., Grubbs, J. B., & Yali, A. M. (2014). The Religious and Spiritual Struggles Scale: Development and initial validation. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 6(3), 208–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036465
Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Gaskin, J. (2016). Stats tools package. http://statwiki.gaskination.com (Retrieved September 11, 2025).
Griffin, B. J., Purcell, N., Burkman, K., Litz, B. T., Bryan, C. J., Schmitz, M., Villierme, C., Walsh, J., & Maguen, S. (2019). Moral injury: An integrative review. Journal of Traumatic Stress. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22362
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
Herek, G. M. (2007). Confronting sexual stigma and prejudice: Theory and practice. Journal of Social Issues, 63(4), 905–925. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00544.x
Herron, P. D. (2020). Current perspectives on the impact of pre‑exposure prophylaxis stigma regarding men who have sex with men in the United States. HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.), 12, 187–192. https://doi.org/10.2147/HIV.S214380
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
Knekta, E., Runyon, C., & Eddy, S. (2019). One Size Doesn't Fit All: Using Factor Analysis to Gather Validity Evidence When Using Surveys in Your Research. CBE life sciences education, 18(1), rm1. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-04-0064
Koenig, H., Youssef, N., & Pearce, M. J. (2019). Assessment of moral injury in veterans and active duty military personnel with PTSD: A review. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 443. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00443
Li, C.-H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 936–949. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7
Litz, B. T., Lebois, L., Silver, R. C., et al. (2022). Defining and assessing the syndrome of moral injury and developing the Moral Injury Outcome Scale (MIOS). Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 923928. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.923928
Litz, B. T., Stein, N., Delaney, E., Lebowitz, L., Nash, W. P., Silva, C., & Maguen, S. (2009). Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans: A preliminary model and intervention strategy. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(8), 695–706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.07.003
Litz, B. T., Yeterian, J., Berke, D., Lang, A. J., Gray, M. J., Nienow, T., Frankfurt, S., Harris, J. I., Maguen, S., & Rusowicz-Orazem, L. (2024). A controlled trial of adaptive disclosure–enhanced to improve functioning and treat posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 92(3), 150–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000873
Maguen, S., Griffin, B. J., Vogt, D., Hoffmire, C. A., Blosnich, J. R., Bernhard, P. A., Akhtar, F. Z., Cypel, Y. S., & Schneiderman, A. I. (2022). Moral injury and peri‑ and post‑military suicide attempts among post‑9/11 veterans. Psychological Medicine, 52(8), 1491–1500. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721005274
Mantri, S., Lawson, J., Wang, Z., & Koenig, H. (2020). Identifying moral injury in healthcare professionals: The Moral Injury Symptom Scale‑HP. Journal of Religion and Health, 59(6), 3051–3065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-020-01065-w
Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674–697. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674
Nicholson, A. A., Narikuzhy, S., Wolf, J., Pichtikova, M., Siegel, M., Mirabelli, J., Hatchard, T., Hosseini-Kamkar, N., Bawagan, E., Roth, S. L., Mutschler, C., Lanius, R. A., Hosseiny, F., Eckstrand, K., & Lueger-Schuster, B. (2025). Identity in turmoil: Investigating the morally injurious dimensions of minority stress. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 16(1), 2479396. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2025.2479396
Pargament, K. I., Smith, B. W., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. (1998). Patterns of positive and negative religious coping with major life stressors. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37(4), 710–724. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388152
Park, C. L., Silverman, E. J., Sacco, S. J., Kim, D., Hall, M. E. L., McMartin, J., Kapic, K., Shannonhouse, L., David, A. B., & Aten, J. (2023). When suffering contradicts belief: Measuring theodical struggling. Current Psychology, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04642-w
Ren, Z., Howe, C. Q., & Zhang, W. (2018). Maintaining mianzi and lizi: Understanding the reasons for formality marriages between gay men and lesbians in China. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 33(5), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461518799517
Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi‑square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66(4), 507–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296192
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Erlbaum.
Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and guilt. Guilford Press.
Tappenden, P. C., Cole, T. A., Valentine, J. N., & Lilly, M. M. (2024). Examining the psychometric properties of the Expressions of Moral Injury Scale in a sample of first responders. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 16(8), 1319–1328. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001569
Weathers, F. W., Litz, B. T., Keane, T. M., Palmieri, P. A., Marx, B. P., & Schnurr, P. P. (2013). The PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). National Center for PTSD.
Wilson, F. R., Pan, W., & Schumsky, D. A. (2012). Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 45(3), 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175612440286
Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample Size Requirements for Structural Equation Models: An Evaluation of Power, Bias, and Solution Propriety. Educational and psychological measurement, 76(6), 913–934. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164413495237
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Interacciones
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors retain the copyright and give the journal the right of the first publication and that they can edit it, reproduce it, distribute it, exhibit it and communicate it in the country and abroad through printed and digital media.
The digital version of the journal is registered under a Creative Commons license (Under Creative Commons License): Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Therefore, this work can be reproduced, distributed and publicly communicated in digital format, provided that the names of the authors and Interacciones.
Therefore, it is established that authors can make other independent and additional behavioural agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (eg, include it in institutional repositories or publish it in a book) as long as it is clearly indicated that the work was published for the first time in this journal.
