Advertisement

Sexuality Research and Social Policy

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 342–352 | Cite as

Differential Effects of the US Supreme Court’s Same-Sex Marriage Decision on National Support for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Civil Rights and Sexual Prejudice

  • Paul B. Perrin
  • Erin R. Smith
  • Michael A. Trujillo
  • Annie Rabinovitch
  • Anthony E. Coy
Article

Abstract

The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in Obergefell v. Hodges legalized same-sex marriage throughout all US states and territories. Before that decision, after, and 1 year later, this successive-independent samples study identified clusters of individuals across the US based on worldview ideologies and used those clusters to examine effects of the SCOTUS decision on support for gay rights and sexual prejudice. Participants were 407 adults from 49 US states and territories. A cluster analysis identified three worldview groups: conservatives (23.6%), moderates (30.2%), and progressives (46.2%). Although no overall changes emerged over time in support for gay rights or sexual prejudice, the conservative group showed a marked polarization after the SCOTUS decision, becoming less supportive of gay rights and more prejudiced. Worldviews explained 68.3% of the variance in same-sex marriage support, 67.5% in gay rights support, and 68.8% in sexual prejudice, effects approaching nearly three times a large-sized effect in the social sciences. These findings add nuance to our understanding of the attitudinal impact of court decisions or legislation around progressive issues like same-sex marriage and gay rights, as well as the potential barriers to cultural progress on these issues.

Keywords

Heterosexism Same-sex marriage Prejudice Civil rights 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.Google Scholar
  2. Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality”. Adv Exp Soc Psychol, 30, 47–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. Int J Psychol Relig, 2(2), 113–133.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327582ijpr0202_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Polit Behav, 24(2), 117–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basow, S. A., & Johnson, K. (2000). Predictors of homophobia in female college students. Sex Roles, 42(5–6), 391–404.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007098221316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baunach, D. M., Burgess, E. O., & Muse, C. S. (2009). Southern (dis)comfort: Sexual prejudice and contact with gay men and lesbians in the South. Sociol Spectr, 30(1), 30–64.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02732170903340893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Becker, A. B., & Scheufele, D. A. (2011). New voters, new outlook? Predispositions, social networks, and the changing politics of gay civil rights. Soc Sci Q, 92(2), 324–345.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00771.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Polit Anal, 20(3), 351–368.  https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bierly, M. M. (1985). Prejudice toward contemporary outgroups as a generalized attitude. J Appl Soc Psychol, 15(2), 189–199.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1985.tb02344.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bishin, B. G., Hayes, T. J., Incantalupo, M. B., & Smith, C. A. (2016). Opinion backlash and public attitudes: Are political advances in gay rights counterproductive? Am J Polit Sci, 60(3), 625–648.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blinder, A. (2015). Alabama judge defies gay marriage law. The New York Times. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/us/gay-marriage-set-to-begin-in-alabama-amid-protest.html
  13. Blinder, A., Pérez-Peña, R. (2015). Kentucky clerk denies same-sex marriage licenses, defying court. The New York Times. Retrieved September 1, 2015 from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/us/same-sex-marriage-kentucky-kim-davis.html?smid=pl-share
  14. Boysen, G. A., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization in response to learning about biological explanations of homosexuality. Sex Roles, 57(9–10), 755–762.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9256-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brannon, L. A., Tagler, M. J., & Eagly, A. H. (2007). The moderating role of attitude strength in selective exposure to information. J Exp Soc Psychol, 43(4), 611–617.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brewer, P. R. (2007). Value war: Public opinion and the politics of gay rights. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Broockman, D., & Kalla, J. (2016). Durably reducing transphobia: A field experiment on door-to-door canvassing. Science, 352(6282), 220–224.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad9713.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspect Psychol Sci, 6(1), 3–5.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393980.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon’s MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Comput Hum Behav, 29(6), 2156–2160.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cochran, S. D., Ackerman, D., Mays, V. M., & Ross, M. W. (2004). Prevalence of non-medical drug use and dependence among homosexually active men and women in the US population. Addiction, 99(8), 989–998.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00759.x.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. J Pers Soc Psychol, 85(5), 808–822.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eriksson, K., & Simpson, B. (2010). Emotional reactions to losing explain gender differences in entering a risky lottery. Judgm Decis Mak, 5(3), 159–163.Google Scholar
  23. Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., Ridder, E. M., & Beautrais, A. L. (2005). Sexual orientation and mental health in a birth cohort of young adults. Psychol Med, 35(7), 971–981.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gardner, R. M., Brown, D. L., & Boice, R. (2012). Using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk website to measure accuracy of body size estimation and body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 9(4), 532–534.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.06.006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gilman, S. E., Cochran, S. D., Mays, V. M., Hughes, M., Ostrow, D., & Kessler, R. C. (2001). Risk of psychiatric disorders among individuals reporting same-sex sexual partners in the National Comorbidity Survey. Am J Public Health, 91(6), 933–939.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goodman, M. B., & Moradi, B. (2008). Attitudes and behaviors toward lesbian and gay persons: Critical correlates and mediated relations. J Couns Psychol, 55(3), 371–384.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.55.3.371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game; a case study. J Abnorm Soc Psychol, 49(1), 129–134.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Herek, G. M. (1988). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. The Journal of Sex Research, 25(4), 451–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Herek, G. M. (1997). The attitudes toward lesbians and gay men (ATLG) scale. In C. M. Davis, W. H. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Sexuality-related measures: A compendium. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Herek, G. M. (2006). Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective. The American Psychologist, 61(6), 607–621.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Herrell, R., Goldberg, J., True, W. R., Ramakrishnan, V., Lyons, M., Eisen, S., & Tsuang, M. T. (1999). Sexual orientation and suicidality: A co-twin control study in adult men. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 56(10), 867–874.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hill, R. M., & Pettit, J. W. (2012). Suicidal ideation and sexual orientation in college students: The roles of perceived burdensomeness, thwarted belongingness, and perceived rejection due to sexual orientation. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 42(5), 567–579.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1943-278X.2012.00113.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Horton, J. J., Rand, D. G., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (2011). The online laboratory: Conducting experiments in a real labor market. Exp Econ, 14(3), 399–425.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-011-9273-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Huff, C., & Tingley, D. (2015). “Who are these people?” Evaluating the demographic characteristics and political preferences of MTurk survey respondents. Research & Politics, 2(3), 2053168015604648.  https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015604648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson, M. K., Rowatt, W. C., Barnard-Brak, L. M., Patock-Peckham, J. A., LaBouff, J. P., & Carlisle, R. D. (2011). A mediational analysis of the role of right-wing authoritarianism and religious fundamentalism in the religiosity–prejudice link. Personal Individ Differ, 50(6), 851–856.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. King, M., Semlyen, J., Tai, S. S., Killaspy, H., Osborn, D., Popelyuk, D., & Nazareth, I. (2008). A systematic review of mental disorder, suicide, and deliberate self harm in lesbian, gay and bisexual people. BMC Psychiatry, 8, 70.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-8-70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Liht, J., Conway, L. G., Savage, S., White, W., & O’Neill, K. A. (2011). Religious fundamentalism: An empirically derived construct and measurement scale. Arch Psychol Relig, 33(3), 299–323.  https://doi.org/10.1163/157361211X594159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Preston, E. (1984). Considering the opposite: A corrective strategy for social judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol, 47(6), 1231–1243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol, 37(11), 2098–2109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mays, V. M., & Cochran, S. D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. Am J Public Health, 91(11), 1869–1876.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McHugh, M. C., & Frieze, I. H. (1997). The measurement of gender-role attitudes: A review and commentary. Psychol Women Q, 21(1), 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00097.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Munro, G. D., & Ditto, P. H. (1997). Biased assimilation, attitude polarization, and affect in reactions to stereotype-relevant scientific information. Personal Soc Psychol Bull, 23(6), 636–653.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297236007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Munro, G. D., Ditto, P. H., Lockhart, L. K., Fagerlin, A., Gready, M., & Peterson, E. (2002). Biased assimilation of sociopolitical arguments: Evaluating the 1996 U.S. presidential debate. Basic Appl Soc Psychol, 24(1), 15–26.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324834BASP2401_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. O’Neil, J. M., Egan, J., Owen, S. V., & Murry, V. M. (1993). The gender role journey measure: Scale development and psychometric evaluation. Sex Roles, 28(3–4), 167–185.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00299279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Paluck, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment of research and practice. Annu Rev Psychol, 60, 339–367.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163607.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pearl, M. L., & Galupo, M. P. (2007). Development and validation of the attitudes toward same-sex marriage scale. J Homosex, 53(3), 117–134.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v53n03_07.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pew. (2010a). Support for same-sex marriage edges upward. Washington DC: Pew Research Center Retrieved from http://www.people-press.org/2010/10/06/support-for-same-sex-marriage-edges-upward/.Google Scholar
  48. Pew. (2010b). The decline of marriage and rise of new families. Washington DC: Pew Research Center Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/11/18/the-decline-of-marriage-and-rise-of-new-families/.Google Scholar
  49. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. J Pers Soc Psychol, 67(4), 741–763.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Price, V., Nir, L., & Cappella, J. N. (2005). Framing public discussion of gay civil unions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(2), 179–212.  https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfi014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rostosky, S. S., Riggle, E. B. D., Horne, S. G., & Miller, A. D. (2009). Marriage amendments and psychological distress in lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adults. J Couns Psychol, 56(1), 56–66.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sherkat, D. E., Powell-Williams, M., Maddox, G., & de Vries, K. M. (2011). Religion, politics, and support for same-sex marriage in the United States, 1988–2008. Soc Sci Res, 40(1), 167–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.08.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sibley, C. G., Wilson, M. S., & Duckitt, J. (2007). Effects of dangerous and competitive worldviews on right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation over a five-month period. Political Psychology, 28(3), 357–371.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00572.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Szymanski, D. M. (2006). Does internalized heterosexism moderate the link between heterosexist events and lesbians’ psychological distress? Sex Roles, 54(3–4), 227–234.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9340-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wang, W., Parker, K., & Taylor, P. (2013). Breadwinner moms. Washington DC. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/29/breadwinner-moms/
  56. Whitley, B. E., & Ægisdóttir, S. (2000). The gender belief system, authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Sex Roles, 42(11–12), 947–967.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007026016001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Whitley, B. E., & Lee, S. E. (2000). The relationship of authoritarianism and related constructs to attitudes toward homosexuality. J Appl Soc Psychol, 30(1), 144–170.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02309.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Whitley Jr., B. E. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. J Pers Soc Psychol, 77(1), 126–134.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wilkinson, W. K., & Migotsky, C. P. (1994). A factor analytic study of epistemological style inventories. The Journal of Psychology, 128(5), 499–516.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1994.9914909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zakrisson, I. (2005). Construction of a short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personal Individ Differ, 39(5), 863–872.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul B. Perrin
    • 1
  • Erin R. Smith
    • 1
  • Michael A. Trujillo
    • 1
  • Annie Rabinovitch
    • 1
  • Anthony E. Coy
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA
  2. 2.University of South Florida Sarasota ManateeSarasotaUSA

Personalised recommendations