Attitudes Toward Sexual Orientation Essay, Research Paper
Runing caput: ATTITUDES TOWARD SEXUAL ORIENTATION
Effectss of Personal History on
Student Attitudes Toward Sexual Orientation
Jordan C. Perry
PSYCH 241 ; Section 1
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Abstraction
Attitudes toward sexual orientation has been a subject of turning involvement in recent old ages as the clime of credence seems to be turning through cognition and exposure. We chose to mensurate people? s current attitudes toward sexual orientation and record facets of their personal history to find a correlativity between the two. A study was designed and distributed to college pupils. With the informations collected, points were tested for dependability and discarded if they did non turn out so. The attitudes were analyzed with the personal history informations, and religionism, holding a friend or household that was homosexual or bisexual, political association, and whether one? s political and moral positions were conservative, broad, or other proved to be important to attitudes toward sexual orientation. The relationships between these points and their several attitudes were explored hypothetically, and it was concluded that diverseness in attitudes is healthy.
Effectss of Personal History on
Student Attitudes Toward Sexual Orientation
In the past 10 old ages, sexual orientation and the demand for its general credence has been a turning subject of involvement. Around the universe but peculiarly in the United States, hosts of work forces and adult females are & # 8220 ; coming out of the cupboard & # 8221 ; about their homosexualism or androgyny, and to a much milder, more accepting environment than in old ages past ( Page, 1998 ) . The topic has even made its manner into pop civilization, with the telecasting show? albeit a canceled one? Ellen having an openly cheery lead character.
Still, many people, frequently groups of people, either do non O.K. of or keep strong reserves against sexual orientations other than heterosexualism. Some faiths preach that it is a wickedness. Other people believe that, by the manner our variety meats are arranged, it merely isn? t natural. This statement, nevertheless, can be counteracted by the possibility of a & # 8220 ; gay & # 8221 ; cistron, so far merely found in work forces, and still non considered to be the specifying factor in homosexualism, simply one that contributes to it.
A figure of experiments have been conducted in the yesteryear to find people? s attitudes toward sexual orientation, and in a few of the more specific experiments ( LaMar & A ; Kite, 1998 ; Lippa & A ; Arad, 1997 ; Waldo, 1998 ) , the nexus between these attitudes and their personal histories has been explored. Simply as an illustration, LaMar and Kite ( 1998 ) found that individual adult females were more accepting of homosexualism than married adult females. Marriage is portion of one? s personal history, and here it was shown to hold an consequence on people? s attitudes toward sexual orientation. So it can be seen that this facet, personal history, is of head importance because it is our histories that form our attitudes, and so any sentiment or experiencing one has toward sexual orientation has been either straight shaped or indirectly influenced by personal history.
In our survey, we wanted to further research the nexus between attitudes toward sexual orientation and personal history, this clip in the more modern-day scene of our equals, college pupils. We hypothesized that some facets from a specified list of personal history properties would correlate with their attitudes toward sexual orientation. We believed this would turn out true because of old experiments conducted correlating personal history with attitudes toward sexual orientation ( LaMar & A ; Kite, 1998 ; Lippa & A ; Arad, 1997 ; Waldo, 1998 ) showed such.
Method
Participants
Students of Psychology Methods class at the University of Massachusetts each freely selected participants, for a sum of 49 participants. Age was divided into groups for the participants, with 1 being under 18 old ages of age, 31 being between 18 and 21, 11 being between 22 and 55, and 6 being between 26 to 30. There were 22 male and 27 female participants.
Certain other demographic statistics of our participants were of peculiar importance to our survey. In footings of religionism, 4 participants considered themselves really spiritual, 26 slightly spiritual, and 19 non at all. 31 participants had either close friends or direct household that was gay, sapphic, or bisexual, while the other 18 did non. Sing political standing, there were 6 Republicans, 15 Democrats, 21 mugwumps, and 7 of some other political standing. In footings of their political and moral positions, 7 felt they were conservative, 32 broad, and 10 other.
Materials
A study was created as a corporate attempt by the Methods class pupils that served two intents: to mensurate attitudes toward sexual orientation foremost, and to garner the personal histories of the participants 2nd.
The study began with 15 statements sing attitudes toward sexual orientation. These statements were meant to reflect a assortment of issues sing sexual orientation, all, nevertheless, with the same focal point of one? s general attitudes towards sexual orientation.
A figure of informational ( personal history ) inquiries followed. These included age, sex, religionism, holding a friend or household that was homosexual or bisexual, political association, and whether one? s political and moral positions were conservative, broad, or other.
Dependability and Scoring
To prove the dependability of these 15 statements in that they besides asked of the same general attitude, we did an point analysis of the information. The 15 single points were treated as though they represented a individual attitude, and so tested against that to see whether each single point fit positively or negatively with the entire attitude measured. Our correlativity standard was at.29, and 6 of our points did non run into this degree for significance. Those that did non run into this standard are still listed in Appendix A with the others, merely they each have an & # 8220 ; R & # 8221 ; after them to mean that they were & # 8220 ; rejected. & # 8221 ; For the statistical analysis of these informations, expression to Postpone 1 ( see Appendix B ) .
& # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; –
Insert Table 1 about here
& # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; –
Responses were measured utilizing a Likert graduated table, with the possible responses runing from 1 ( wholly disagree ) to 5 ( wholly agree ) . Some points were reverse-coded because they stated an sentiment antonym of what we were usually mensurating. This was done to command response prejudice, in instance some participants tended to tag higher or lower tonss in general, in some ways irrespective of the statements to which they were reacting.
With merely 9 statements staying? and change by reversal hiting integral on the opposing statements? the possible tonss ranged from 9 to 45, with a higher mark significance that the individual was, harmonizing to his or her responses to the statements on our study, more unfastened to sexual orientations other than heterosexualism.
Procedure
The pupils conducted the experiment on their ain clip and under their ain conditions, given the direction that the participants be about their equals in age and to take 2 males and 2 females. The pupils gave the participants a transcript of the study to com
plete, adding that the participants confidentiality was assured. After the studies were completed, the pupils transferred the answered to scantron, and the information was collected in that format by the lab teacher.
Consequences
Through our experiment, it was shown that so specific facets of personal history attributes significantly correlative with attitudes toward sexual orientation. These specific facets that showed important consequences in footings of attitude were religionism, holding a friend or household that was homosexual or bisexual, political association, and whether one? s political and moral positions were conservative, broad, or other. Personal history factors that did non turn out important to attitudes toward sexual orientation were age, sex, spiritual association, sexual orientation, oppugning one? s ain sexual individuality, the country where one grew up, and the one-year income of one? s attention givers.
Religiosity proved important ( F ( 2, 46 ) =3.77, p*.05 ) . Nonreligious people were the most accepting of other sexual orientations, keeping the mean at 39.68 with a standard divergence of 4.71. Slightly spiritual people were less accepting, keeping the mean at 36.42 with a standard divergence 6.76. Very spiritual people were the least accepting, keeping the mean at 31.50 with a standard divergence of 4.43.
If the respondent had a close friend or direct household that was gay, sapphic, or bisexual, the respondent was besides significantly more accepting of other sexual orientations than those whom did non hold homosexual or sapphic friends or household ( F ( 1, 47 ) =29.15, p*.05 ) . The mean for those that personally knew homophiles or bisexuals was 40.19 with a standard divergence of 3.78, and the mean for those that did non was 32.28 with a standard divergence of 6.52.
One? s political association besides proved of import to one? s attitudes on sexual orientation in our experiment ( F ( 3, 45 ) =7.44, p*.05 ) . Republicans were the least accepting, the mean being 27.83 with a standard divergence of 2.04. Mugwumps were more accepting, the mean being 38.19 with a standard divergence of 5.97. Democrats and those who marked & # 8220 ; other & # 8221 ; were the most accepting, both holding a mean of 39.00, with a standard divergence of 5.41 for the democrats and a standard divergence of 4.12 for the others.
Finally, the stringency of one? s political and moral positions was significantly of import as good ( F ( 2, 46 ) =7.07, p*.05 ) . Conservatives were the least accepting, the mean being 30.00 with a standard divergence of 6.40. Those who marked themselves as other were more accepting, the mean being 37.90 with a standard divergence of 6.52. Liberals were the most accepting, the mean being 38.69 with a standard divergence of 5.07.
Below in Table 2 ( see Appendix C ) is the information and descriptive statistics from above in graph format.
& # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8211 ;
Insert Table 2 about here
& # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8211 ;
Discussion
From our experiment, we have come to the decision that there is a definite, statistically important correlativity between personal history features and attitudes toward sexual orientation, as was besides found in other recent research conducted by LaMar and Kite ( 1998 ) , Lippa and Arad ( 1997 ) , and Waldo ( 1998 ) . The personal history features measured by our survey were religionism, holding a friend or household that was homosexual or bisexual, political association, and whether one? s political and moral positions were conservative, broad, or other.
It makes most sense to presume that these personal history features result in attitudes toward sexual orientation, non the other manner around. It is a good known fact that many faiths look down on homosexualism, and hence if one follows a faith closely? as being really spiritual agencies? they are more likely to be less O.K.ing of homosexualism.
Having a close friend or household member that is cheery is easy apprehensible in the ways in which it affects one? s attitudes toward sexual orientation. Peoples may be disapproving of homophiles without even cognizing any, but when they meet a homosexual and see that, at least by and large, homophiles are normal people, so their sentiments of homosexualism alteration. The contrary of this could besides be true, nevertheless, in that 1 who is disapproving of homosexualism consciously chooses to non go friends with homophiles.
Political association and one? s political and moral positions are frequently both closely tied to faith. Republicans are, by and large, trusters of the Christian religion, while Democrats and mugwumps are more likely than republicans to see themselves less or even non-religious. Furthermore, conservative positions are by and large considered republican and broad positions are by and large considered democratic or independent, explicating the relationship each seemed to hold with attitudes toward sexual orientation.
Whether homosexualism should or should non be approved of or accepted is non a determination we, or anyone, is in the place to do. Each individual, so, must fall back to their ain feelings and sentiments to find what sexual orientation means to them and what their attitudes are toward it. Our research has shown that there is still a great trade of assortment in people? s attitudes toward sexual orientation, a fact that should be accepted and so promoted so that diverseness may stay, so long as it doesn? t negatively affect other persons or groups.
Mentions
LaMar, Lisa, & A ; Kite, Mary ( 1998 ) . Sexual activity differences in attitudes toward cheery work forces and tribades: a multidimensional position. Journal of Sex Research, 35 ( 2 ) , 189-196.
Lippa, Richard, & A ; Arad, Sara ( 1997 ) . The construction of sexual orientation and its relation to maleness, muliebrity, and gender diagnosticity: different for work forces and adult females. Sexual activity Roles, 37 ( 3-4 ) , 187-208.
Page, Stewart ( 1998 ) . Accepting the cheery individual: a rental adjustment in the community. Journal of Homosexuality, 36 ( 2 ) , 41-58.
Waldo, Craig R. ( 1998 ) . Out on campus: sexual orientation and academic civilization in a university context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26 ( 5 ) , 745-774.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Reliability Scores of the 15 Attitude Statements
Q1: .403 *
Q2: .247
Q3: .091
Q4: .270
Q5: .313 *
Q6: .285 *
Q7: .316 *
Q8: .165
Q9: .323 *
Q10: .324 *
Q11: .327 *
Q12: .268
Q13: .284 *
Q14: .272
Q15: .345 *
* = These informations were important adequate to go through the correlativity standard of.29.
Appendix C
Descriptive Statisticss of Personal History? s Relevance to
Attitudes Toward Sexual Orientation
categoryvariablex ( average ) SDFdfP
religiosityvery31.504.433.77 ( 2, 46 ) *.05
somewhat36.426.76
non at all39.684.71
homosexual friendsno32.286.5229.15 ( 1, 47 ) *.05
or familyyes40.193.78
politicalrepublican27.832.047.44 ( 3, 45 ) *.05
affiliationindependent38.195.97
democrat39.005.41
other39.004.12
political andconservative30.006.407.07 ( 2, 46 ) *.05
moral viewsother37.906.52
liberal38.695.07
