Science, Sexuality, and Civil Rights: Does Information on the Causes of Sexual Orientation Change Attitudes?

Suhay, Elizabeth; Garretson, Jeremiah J.

doi:10.1086/694896

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Haaland and Roth (forthcoming) show that randomly assigned information treatments about the extent of racial discrimination in hiring led to convergence in beliefs about discrimination across the political spectrum but had no effects on support for pro-Black policies. In the context of LGB rights, Suhay and Garretson (2018) find that experimentally exposing respondents to scientific information on the origins of sexual orientation (i.e., whether homosexuality is a choice) did not affect support for gay rights in the United States. Harrison and Michelson (2017), in contrast, show that experimentally providing subjects with information that a leader in a group with a shared identity to the respondent supports LGBrights, significantly increases support from members of that group.…”

Section: Related Literature and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Reducing Sexual-Orientation Discrimination: Experimental Evidence from Basic Information Treatments

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study basic information treatments regarding sexual orientation using randomized experiments in three countries with strong and widespread anti-gay attitudes: Serbia, Turkey, and Ukraine. Participants who received information about the economic costs to society of sexual-orientation discrimination were significantly more likely than those in a control group to support equal employment opportunities based on sexual orientation. Information that the World Health Organization (WHO) does not regard homosexuality as a mental illness increased social acceptance of sexual minorities, but only for those who reported trust in the WHO. Our results have important implications for policy makers aiming to expand the rights of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Related Literature and Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Reducing Sexual-Orientation Discrimination: Experimental Evidence from Basic Information Treatments

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, contradictory to these findings, the same researchers published another study 2 years later which found that learning about the biological innateness of sexual orientation did not affect attitudes towards gays and lesbians (Suhay & Garretson, 2018). They attributed the inconsistent findings to motivated reasoning, in which political partisanship superseded scientific knowledge in predicting attitudes towards sexual minorities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Those who understand the underlying processes of producing trusted scientific claims are more likely to be immune to pseudoscientific claims regarding sexual minorities, which in turn helps improve attitudes towards such groups. Exposure to news coverage explaining the scientific basis of same‐sex attraction has also been demonstrated to improve attitudes towards gays and lesbians (Garretson & Suhay, 2016; Suhay & Garretson, 2018). Furthermore, a higher level of knowledge has been shown to be associated with positive intergroup attitudes—including attitudes towards sexual minorities (Alderson, Orzeck, & McEwen, 2009; Cao, Wang, & Gao, 2010; Wells & Franken, 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gods, germs, and science: Unraveling the role of scientific literacy, germ aversion, and religious fundamentalism in predicting attitudes towards gays and lesbians

Hudiyana

Prawira²,

Kartika³

et al. 2021

Community & Applied Soc Psy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior studies suggest that scientific knowledge may improve attitudes towards sexual minorities such as gays and lesbians. But in what context does this ring true? The present study aims to test whether scientific literacy can predict attitudes towards gays and lesbians when considering the variables pathogen avoidance and religious fundamentalism in a moderated moderation model. A total of 1,398 participants (female = 74.9%, Mage = 25.15, SD = 5.84) completed our online survey. We found that an increase in scientific literacy can indeed predict an improvement in attitudes towards sexual minorities, specifically gays and lesbians. However, this effect was weakened in the condition of high pathogen avoidance, specifically for one of the dimensions of pathogen avoidance—germ aversion. When considering the value of religious fundamentalism in a three‐way interaction, we found that scientific literacy can remain effective in predicting attitudes towards sexual minorities only within the condition of low germ aversion. Thus, threat avoidance such as germ aversion, contrary to religious fundamentalism, may diminish the benefits of scientific literacy in improving attitudes towards sexual minorities. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

show abstract

“…For instance, recent developmental research revealed no causal relationship between essentialism and intergroup prejudice (although resource allocation was affected, Rhodes et al, 2018). Recent political science research similarly revealed no casual relationship between biological explanations and prejudice toward gay individuals (Suhay & Garretson, 2018). Other work finds that experimental effects only occur for certain types of biological essentialism (Andreychik & Gill, 2015), only as mediated through other factors (Mandalaywala et al, 2018), or only for participants who are already quite high in essentialism (Keller, 2005;Rangel & Keller, 2011).…”

Section: Other Possible Relationships Between Essentialism and Intergroup Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Essentialism Correlates with (But Doesn’t Cause?) Intergroup Bias

Bailey¹,

Knobe²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People with biological essentialist beliefs about social groups also tend to endorse biased beliefs about individuals in those groups, including stereotypes, prejudices, and intensified emphasis on the group. These correlations could be due to biological essentialism causing bias, and some experimental studies support this causal direction. Given this prior work, we expected to find that biological essentialism would lead to increased bias compared to a control condition and set out to extend this prior work in a new direction (regarding “value-based” essentialism). But although the manipulation affected essentialist beliefs and essentialist beliefs were correlated with stereotyping (Studies 1, 2a, and 2b), prejudice (Studies 2a), and group emphasis (Study 3), there was no evidence that biological essentialism caused these outcomes. Given these findings, our initial research question became moot, and the present work focuses on reexamining the relationship between essentialism and bias. We discuss possible moderators, reverse causation, and third variables.

show abstract

Science, Sexuality, and Civil Rights: Does Information on the Causes of Sexual Orientation Change Attitudes?

Cited by 18 publications

References 5 publications

Reducing Sexual-Orientation Discrimination: Experimental Evidence from Basic Information Treatments

Reducing Sexual-Orientation Discrimination: Experimental Evidence from Basic Information Treatments

Gods, germs, and science: Unraveling the role of scientific literacy, germ aversion, and religious fundamentalism in predicting attitudes towards gays and lesbians

Biological Essentialism Correlates with (But Doesn’t Cause?) Intergroup Bias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About