Understanding attitudes that may lead to barriers to equality can help enhance social inclusion and quality of life for individuals with intellectual disabilities. The current study examined multidimensional attitudes toward individuals with intellectual disabilities. We expected that those with more knowledge and greater quantity and quality of contact with people with intellectual disabilities would have more positive attitudes toward this social group. Hierarchical multiple regressions revealed that greater knowledge and quantity of contact were unrelated to attitudes. Greater quality of contact, however, was associated with more positive attitudes. These findings add support to previous findings that positive experiences may lead to less intergroup anxiety, less hostility, and less avoidance of outgroups.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. Masculine honor consists of stereotypic beliefs about male behavior, including the belief that men’s aggression is appropriate, justifiable, and necessary in response to provocation, especially provocation that insults or threatens one’s manhood, family, or romantic partner. We conducted two studies examining the relationships between stereotypic masculine honor beliefs and perceptions of rape. Masculine honor beliefs generally were associated with both negative attitudes toward rape and negative attitudes toward women who have been raped. Further, different components of masculine honor beliefs correlated differently with various rape perceptions. These outcomes illustrate the complexity of the stereotypic beliefs about appropriate male behavior that comprise masculine honor, and which emphasize men’s responsibility to both take care of others and demonstrate interpersonal dominance.

We hypothesized that individual differences in masculine honor beliefs (MHBs) would predict participants' views of the world and the potential for evil and good among the people in it, as well as their attitudes toward war, peace, and aggressive security policies. Participants' levels of MHBs were positively associated with their support for war and aggressive security policies (Studies 1 and 2), as well as beliefs in pure evil and perceptions of the world as a competitive jungle (Study 2), and they were negatively associated with their support for peacemaking (Study 2) even after controlling for participants' levels of social desirability, conservatism, and trait aggression (Study 1); sex (Studies 1 and 2); and beliefs in pure evil and pure good (Study 2). We contend that individual differences in MHB are important for understanding how individuals perceive their worlds as places in which the potential and capacity for violence are needed to maintain safety and security.