A Latent Profile Analysis of Social Support, Online Contacts, and Preference for Online Communication Among Same- and Both-Sex Attracted and Other-Sex Attracted Adolescents

Figures & data

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (N = 6,823).

Variables	Complete sample	Other-sex attracted	Same- and both-sex attracted	p	Min – Max	% missing
	M (SD)/%	M (SD)/%	M (SD)/%
Sexual attraction						2.9
Other-sex attracted	93.1%
Same-sex attraction	1.6%
Both sex attraction	2.4%
Peer support	5.78 (1.33)	5.79 (1.32)	5.54 (1.45)	.002	1.00—7.00	0.2
Family support	6.02 (1.34)	6.05 (1.32)	5.37 (1.66)	<.001	1.00—7.00	0.2
Online contact
Close friends	3.73 (1.06)	3.73 (1.05)	3.70 (1.16)	.569	1.00—5.00	1.8
Friends from a larger friend group	2.84 (1.21)	2.84 (1.21)	2.78 (1.22)	.420	1.00—5.00	6.0
Friends met through the internet	2.03 (1.27)	1.99 (1.24)	2.58 (1.47)	<.001	1.00—5.00	46.8
People other than friends	2.90 (1.22)	2.91 (1.22)	2.71 (1.25)	.007	1.00—5.00	6.7
Preference for online communication	2.10 (1.13)	2.07 (1.12)	2.66 (1.26)	<.001	1.00—5.00	1.2
Age	14.73 (1.59)	14.74 (1.60)	15.22 (1.58)	<.001	12.00—18.98	0.0
Gender/sex				<.001		0.0
Boy	49.3%	49.5%	38.9%
Girl	5.7%	50.5%	61.1%
Migration background				.140		0.01
Native	78.8%	79.9%	75.3%
Non-native	21.2%	21.0%	24.7%
Education level				.166		0.0
Lower pre-vocational education	15.8%	15.5%	14.2%
Higher pre-vocational education	27.9%	27.7%	27.3%
Higher general education	26.5%	26.7%	22.5%
Pre-scientific education	29.9%	30.1%	36.0%
Family affluence				.002		2.5
Low	9.1%	9.1%	14.9%
Middle	47.7%	48.9%	50.2%
High	4.7%	42.1%	34.9%

Table 2. Fit statistics for latent profile analyses.

	LL	Change in LL^a	AIC	Change in AIC^a	Adj BIC	Change in Adj AIC^a	VLMR	LMR	Entropy	Min-Max n
1 profile	−70,210.27		140,448.54	–	140,499.64	–	–	–	–	–
2 profiles	−68,127.40	−2,082.87	136,298.80	4,149.74	136,379.10	4,120.54	<.001	<.001	.95	688–6,135
3 profiles	−66,772.59	−1,354.81	133,605.18	2,693.62	133,714.68	2,664.42	<.001	<.001	.76	625–3,966
4 profiles	−66,079.25	−693.34	132,234.51	1,370.67	132,373.22	1,341.46	<.001	<.001	.78	350–2,671
5 profiles	-65613.68	−465.57	131,319.35	915.16	131,487.27	885.95	<.001	<.001	.81	343–2,924
6 profiles	−65,168.58	−445.10	130,445.15	874.20	130,642.27	845.00	<.001	<.001	.80	189–2,861
7 profiles	−64,778.28	−390.30	129,680.56	764.59	129,906.88	735.39	<.001	<.001	.82	165–2,755
8 profiles	−64,485.50	−292.78	129,111.01	569.55	129,366.53	540.35	<.001	<.001	.79	169–2,845
9 profiles	−64,245.50	−240.00	128,647.01	464.00	128,931.73	434.80	.02	.03	.79	124–2,537
10 profiles	−64014.96	−230.54	128201.91	445.10	128,515.84	415.89	.03	.03	.80	132–2,612

LL, Log Likelihood; AIC, Akaike’s Information Criterion; Adj BIC, adjusted Bayesian Information Criterion; VLMR Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood ratio test; LMR, Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood ratio test.

^aChange compared to the k-1 class.

Figure 1. Visual representation of latent profile analysis with 5 profiles.

Because of the different ranges of the variables, standardized values are presented.

Table 3. Description of latent profiles analysis with 5 profiles.

	High support, online contact, and average online communication preference		High support, low online contact, and weak online communication preference		Average support, high online contact, and strong online communication preference		Low support, low online contact, and average online communication preference		Low support, average online contact, and average online communication preference
	(n = 2,432)		(n = 2,924)		(n = 675)		(n = 449)		(n = 343)
	M (SE)	95% CI	M (SE)	95% CI	M (SE)	95% CI	M (SE)	95% CI	M (SE)	95% CI
Peer support	6.32 (0.02)	[6.28, 6.36]	5.77 (0.04)	[5.69, 5.84]	5.68 (0.06)	[5.56, 5.80]	4.48 (0.17)	[4.15, 4.81]	4.10 (0.16)	[3.79, 4.42]
Family support	6.65 (0.02)	[6.62, 6.68]	6.56 (0.02)	[6.53, 6.60]	4.65 (0.11)	[4.43, 4.86]	4.57 (0.13)	[4.32, 4.83]	1.80 (0.07)	[1.65, 1.94]
Online contact
Close friends	4.43 (0.02)	[4.39, 4.47]	3.18 (0.06)	[3.07, 3.29]	4.33 (0.07)	[4.20, 4.47]	2.62 (0.17)	[2.28, 2.95]	3.72 (0.09)	[3.55, 3.90]
Friends from a larger friend group	3.77 (0.07)	[3.63, 3.91]	2.06 (0.03)	[2.00, 2.12]	3.34 (0.13)	[3.08, 3.61]	1.75 (0.08)	[1.60, 1.91]	2.91 (0.09)	[2.73, 3.09]
Friends met through the internet	2.32 (0.06)	[2.21, 2.43]	1.60 (0.03)	[1.54, 1.65]	2.50 (0.13)	[2.24, 2.75]	1.66 (0.07)	[1.53, 1.80]	2.26 (0.10)	[2.06, 2.46]
People other than friends	3.46 (0.04)	[3.39, 3.53]	2.57 (0.04)	[2.49, 2.64]	2.87 (0.09)	[2.70, 3.04]	2.07 (0.07)	[1.93, 2.21]	2.80 (0.09)	[2.63, 2.96]
Preference for online communication	2.11 (0.03)	[2.05, 2.17]	1.88 (0.02)	[1.83, 1.92]	2.84 (0.08)	[2.68, 3.00]	2.22 (0.07)	[2.09, 2.35]	2.26 (0.08)	[2.11, 2.41]

Table 4. Multinomial regression analyses with profile membership as outcome.

	High support, low online contact, and weak online communication preference		Average support, high online contact, and strong online communication preference		Low support, low online contact, and average online communication preference		Low support, average online contact, and average online communication preference
	Odds ratio	95% CI	Odds ratio	95% CI	Odds ratio	95% CI	Odds ratio	95% CI
Sexual attraction (Ref = Other-sex attracted)
Same- and both-sex attracted	1.07	[0.68, 1.66]	3.05	[1.93, 4.81]	2.74	[1.59, 4.72]	2.85	[1.74, 4.65]
Age	0.92	[0.88, 0.97]	1.21	[1.13, 1.29]	0.98	[0.90, 1.07]	1.18	[1.09, 1.27]
Gender/sex (Ref = boy)
Girl	0.61	[0.53, 0.71]	1.15	[0.92, 1.43]	0.45	[0.35, 0.58]	0.86	[0.67, 1.09]
Migration background (Ref = native)
Non-native	0.75	[0.62, 0.90]	1.15	[0.89, 1.48]	1.27	[0.96, 1.68]	1.31	[0.99, 1.72]
Education level Ref = lower pre-vocational education)
Lower pre-vocational education	1.16	[0.92, 1.46]	0.72	[0.50, 1.02]	1.08	[0.76, 1.55]	0.77	[0.56, 1.06]
Higher pre-vocational education	1.39	[1.09, 1.76]	1.30	[0.94, 1.81]	1.04	[0.71, 1.52]	0.55	[0.38, 0.79]
Higher general education	1.67	[1.32, 2.12]	0.89	[0.64, 1.26]	0.89	[0.60, 1.32]	0.41	[0.28, 0.60]
Family affluence (Ref = low)
Middle	0.99	[0.75, 1.31]	0.84	[0.57, 1.23]	0.66	[0.45, 0.97]	0.55	[0.38, 0.80]
High	0.65	[0.49, 0.86]	0.67	[0.45, 0.99]	0.35	[0.23, 0.54]	0.50	[0.34, 0.74]

Bold number indicate p < .05.

^aHigh support, online contact, and average online communication preference is the reference profile.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from Gonneke W. J. M. Stevens, upon reasonable request.