Dispositional mindfulness and intergroup bias

The concept of mindfulness has its roots in Buddhist traditions. However, it is not merely a form of meditation; rather, it is a positive personal resource and a state of awareness that encompasses the notion of non-judgmental acceptance of life experiences (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). The term ‘mindfulness’ is used to describe both a stable disposition and a dynamic state that individuals exhibit in a given moment and that can be trained. As Nezlek et al. (2016) point out, if mindfulness can be thought of as a state of the individual - an orientation to action at a given time - then dispositional mindfulness can be understood as the average of these experiential states.

The non-judgmental aspect of dispositional mindfulness posits that mindful people might be less susceptible to intergroup biases. Indeed, a growing body of recent literature has examined the impact of mindfulness on the reduction of stereotypes and prejudice (Djikic et al., 2008; Fuochi et al., 2023). The increased interest in literature examining the links between mindfulness and stereotypes or prejudice can be attributed to a specific mechanism promoted by mindfulness in individuals: the de-automatization process (Kang et al., 2013). This process involves making decisions without engaging in conscious thought. Being in a mindful state can facilitate the interruption of automated emotional and cognitive responses by reducing automatic inference processing, enhancing cognitive control, fostering metacognitive insight, and preventing the suppression of thoughts. Furthermore, mindfulness fosters open and agreeable responses to the environmental stimuli and reduces anxiety when encountering novel experiences or people (Weinstein et al., 2009). Therefore, this mindful aspect, along with the others, could reduce levels of prejudice by improving one’s ability to manage new situations and people.

A substantial body of research has demonstrated that dispositional mindfulness can be an effective strategy for reducing prejudice in a range of contexts (e.g., Oyler et al., 2022). and including various target people such as elderly people (Lueke & Gibson, 2015), homeless people (Parks et al., 2014), gay men (Salvati et al., 2019) and lesbian women (Salvati & Chiorri, 2023).

However, the current body of research investigating the connection between dispositional mindfulness and prejudice is not yet exhaustive and presents conflicting findings. In their systematic review, Oyler et al. (2022) propose that dispositional mindfulness may have the capacity to mitigate intergroup bias towards a range of outgroups, employing diverse self-report, implicit, and behavioural measurement techniques. Nevertheless, the results showed small effects on the relationships between the constructs of mindfulness and intergroup bias. Nicol and De France (2018) did not find any significant associations between different measures of self-related mindfulness (i.e. Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, the Cognitive and Affective MindfulnessScale-Revised, and the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills) and three markers of prejudice (i.e. attitudes towards outgroups, the affective thermometer scale, and social worldviews). In another study, researchers identified a gender difference about the role of dispositional mindfulness, as assessed using the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (Gervais & Hoffman, 2013) in sexism. Specifically, among male participants, increased mindfulness was found to be correlated with greater internal motivation to respond without sexism, reduced benevolent sexism, and increased warmth towards feminists. In contrast, among female participants, a higher level of mindfulness was only associated with a reduction in hostile sexism. Ivers et al. (2021) found a significant negative association between mindfulness, as measured by the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), and implicit racial bias in a sample of mental practitioners. Nevertheless, only the Observing facet of dispositional mindfulness showed a statistically significant association with racial bias.

FFMQ is one of the most widely utilized tools for the assessment self-centered mindfulness (Baer et al., 2006). This scale comprises five facets of dispositional mindfulness: (a) observing: the ability to observe and to be focus on the inner experiences; (b) describing: the capacity to label emotions, body sensations, and other internal experiences; (c) acting-with-awareness: the ability of being in the hic-et-nunc, without acting with autopilot; (d) non-judging of inner experiences: the ability not to evaluate one’s internal experiences negatively or positively, practicing abstention from judgment; (e) non-reacting: the capacity to restrain the impulse to react to one’s internal experiences with ruminative thoughts or impulsive behavior.

Salvati et al. (2019) examined the relationships between dispositional mindfulness, as measured by the FFMQ and sexual prejudice, as well as internalized sexual stigma, among both heterosexual and gay/bisexual men. The results showed that a mindful, non-judging attitude towards one’s inner experience was associated with reduced levels of internalized sexual stigma among gay and bisexual men. Conversely, a mindful, observing disposition appears to facilitate the reduction of sexual prejudice among heterosexual men against gay men. In a further study, Salvati and Chiorri (2023) also indicated that maintaining a mindful, non-judgmental attitude towards one’s inner experience is correlated with lower levels of internalized sexual stigma in lesbian and bisexual women. Conversely, dispositional mindfulness was not found to be associated with sexual prejudice against gay and lesbian individuals among heterosexual women. Platt and Szoka (2021) explored the relationships between feminist beliefs, openness to experience, mindful acceptance (as measured by the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale) and transphobia. The findings indicated that the endorsement of feminist beliefs and openness are associated with a reduction in transphobia. However, the same was not observed for mindful acceptance of one’s emotions. In these studies, the focus was primarily on the acceptance of one’s own emotions and the capacity for non-judgmental self-perception, not including specific measurements of acceptance towards others.

The nonjudgmental regard towards others, sexual prejudice and transphobia

Most of previous studies of the relationships between dispositional mindfulness and intergroup bias have almost always focused on mindfulness as being self-aware of one’s own internal experiences (i.e., beliefs, emotions, bodily sensations). Operationalizations and assessments of mindfulness have neglected to include the awareness and acceptance of the internal experiences of others. Indeed, current mindfulness measures may fall short in measuring outward acceptance and nonjudgmental attitudes towards others, potentially limiting our ability to fully explore and capture the relationship between mindfulness and prejudice (Nicole & De France, 2022). This may be one of the reasons why findings in the literature on dispositional mindfulness and intergroup bias are not always consistent (either in statistical significance, or in the direction, or in the effect size of the associations). This issue could be addressed, by taking into account tools specifically designed to measure non-judgmental regard for others as a kind of cognitive and emotional acceptance and an open attitude of not attaching labels and not making positive/negative attributions (Nicol & De France, 2022).

In 2022, Nicol and De France extended the conceptualization of dispositional mindfulness by validating the NRO scale. They developed the NRO scale by takinfg existing trait mindfulness items and extending them to others. The new scale measures two components of non-judgmental regard for others and the preference not to judge others: Ideological Acceptance and Emotion Acceptance. The first component relates to acceptance of others’ actions, ideas, and personality, while the second one describes acceptance of others’ emotions and emotional expressions. Thus, such a construct involves awareness and acceptance of the cognitive and affective states of others, serving as a metacognitive skill that directs individuals towards both emotional states and surrounding stimuli with a non-reactive and accepting attitude. Nicol and De France (2022) found that the two aspects of mindfulness were independently associated with prejudice towards various outgroups (i.e. feminists, sex workers, drug users, people who are overweight, gay men, and people with disabilities) over and above common predictors of prejudice such as Social Dominance Orientation or Right-Wing Authoritarianism. The authors also found that the sub-dimensions of NRO were correlated with– as well as distinct from - the mindfulness facets of the FFMQ. Specifically, Emotion Acceptance was found to be associated with the Observing dimension and the Describing facet of dispositional mindfulness whereas Ideological Acceptance was positively associated with Acting with Awareness and Nonjudging of Experience.

The contribution introduced by the NRO extended the study of the effects of mindfulness and nonjudgmental attitudes on prejudice not only by introducing a different scale but also by contributing to the development of a different line of theoretical reflection. Indeed, current research has expanded the study of mindfulness understood not only as an intrapersonal phenomenon but also as an interpersonal ability with social consequences (Donald et al., 2019; Skoranski et al., 2019). For instance, some studies have found that mindful people are less likely to judge others’ behaviors, beliefs and emotions as a result of their ability to self-regulate and de-automatise of cognitive responses (Gervais & Hoffman, 2013; Kang et al., 2013). Mindfulness trainings improve our capacity for sustained attention (Chiesa et al., 2011), which in turn may increase our ability to observe the others’ needs (Condon, 2017). Other research also found that mindfulness trainings are associated with positive emotions, helping behaviours (Cameron & Fredrickson, 2015), and compassionate and flexible responses to others’ suffering (Condon, 2017). Furthermore, some studies have shown that mindful individuals are less anxious when interacting with new people, and are open to dealing with new and challenging environmental stimuli in a non-judgmental way (Weinstein et al., 2009).

While this evidence seems to suggest a significant role for nonjudgmental regard towards others in increasing tolerance and reducing intergroup bias (see Donald et al., 2019; Ng et al., 2021 for reviews), few studies have compared the combined role of self-oriented dispositional mindfulness and nonjudgmental regard towards others play in reducing prejudice against LGBTQ + people. In particular, the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and transphobic attitudes has never been examined. Indeed, no studies have examined the combined relationship between NRO and mindfulness on prejudice against transgender and non-binary people.

Given these premises, in this research we aim to extend previous evidence by showing that high levels of NRO can be associated with both low levels of sexual prejudice against lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, and with low levels of transphobia against transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people.

The current study

Sexual prejudice refers to a negative attitudes towards people based on their membership in a group defined by sexual attractions, behaviors, or orientation (Herek & McLemore, 2013). LGBTQ + people are still targets of sexual prejudice in many modern societies all over the world (Salvati et al., 2020). At the same time, TGD people are victims of prejudices based on their gender identity and experience various forms of discrimination that often go unreported (Flores et al., 2022). Such negative attitudes towards TGD people are often referred to in literature as ‘transphobia’ (King et al., 2020). A number of studies have found that dispositional mindfulness can be beneficial for prejudice reduction including sexual prejudice against gay men (Salvati et al., 2019) and lesbian women (Salvati & Chiorri, 2023). In general, sexual prejudice continues to negatively impact the health of LGBTQ + people, but research examining unique relationships between mindfulness and negative attitudes towards specific sexual and gender minority groups is limited. In this vein, this study contributes to the research examining the relationship between mindfulness and prejudice towards specific subgroups within the LGBTQ + community by identifying unique contributing factors that contribute to prejudice reduction. Furthermore, this study includes the consideration of NRO as a measure of non-judgmental regards towards others.

The first research aim of the current study is to extend previous studies investigating the associations between dispositional mindfulness and sexual prejudice towards gay, bisexual, and lesbian individuals (Salvati & Chiorri, 2021; Salvati et al., 2019), including measures of transphobia and gender bashing, and thus to explore the role of dispositional mindfulness in reducing prejudice towards TGD individuals. In addition, the current study has a second innovative aim compared to previous literature on this topic in that it includes a measure of nonjudgmental regards towards others (i.e. NRO).

As a first prediction (H1), we expect that nonjudgmental regards towards others will be negatively associated with sexual prejudice against gay, lesbian and bisexual people, over and above other self-oriented mindful traits and controlling for several socio-psychological variables that have been found to be associated with sexual prejudice and transphobia in the previous literature, such as male gender, older age, low level of education, right-wing political orientation, high religiosity, traditional masculinity, high social dominance orientation, and high right-wing authoritarianism (Salvati & Chiorri, 2021; Salvati et al., 2019; Scandurra et al., 2017). Furthermore, we also hypothesize that nonjudgmental regards towards others will be negatively associated with both gender bashing (H2a) and genderism/transphobia (H2b) over and above other self-oriented mindful traits and controlling for the same socio-psychological variables.

Method

Participants and procedures

The current study is part of a larger research project on mindfulness and sexual prejudice conducted in Italy, which aimed to involve both heterosexual cisgender people and other people of gender and sexual minorities. However, in the current study, we focused only on cis-heterosexual participants only. Therefore, to be included in the sample, the inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) Understand Italian; (b) be at least 18 years old; (c) be a cisgender man or woman; (d) have a heterosexual or predominantly heterosexual sexual orientation. Based on these criteria, our sample consisted of 911 participants (men = 316; 34.7%; women = 595; 65.3%), aged between 18 and 80 years old, M = 32.62, SD = 14.91. The descriptive statistics are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Sample’s descriptives
Full size table

The LimeSurvey platform was used to deliver a self-report questionnaire electronically. Data collection started in late 2022 and ended in May 2023. The study was presented to participants as a survey on some personality characteristics and gender issues. Potential participants were identified through convenience sampling, and they were made aware that the survey was completely anonymous and that they could skip any questions they did not want to answer. Specifically, data collection was carried out by some university students on one of the authors’ social psychology course in exchange for university credits. They were asked to forward the link to the questionnaire to the participants contacted for the participation. Participants gave their informed consent before starting the questionnaire and, after completing it, received a brief explanation of the study’s aims. The study, which complied with the WMA Declaration of Helsinki (1964/2013), was approved by the Ethics Review Board for Research in Psychology at the University of Verona.

Measures

Socio-anagraphic

Participants were asked to indicate their biological sex (1 = male; 2 = female; 3 = intersex; 4 = I prefer not to answer), gender (1 = agender; 2 = cisgender; 3 = trans*; 4 = other), age, nationality, educational level, working status, and socio-economic status (Table 1). Furthermore, participants reported their sexual orientation, using a single item with six options (1 = Exclusively heterosexual; 2 = Predominantly heterosexual; 3 = Bisexual; 4 = Predominantly homosexual; 5 = Exclusively homosexual; 6 = other), already used in several previous studies (Salvati et al., 2023, 2024).

Religiosity

Participants responded to a single item asking to report their religion, and subsequently, they were invited to respond to four items on a 5-point, Likert-type scale to measure their level of religiosity, from 1 = not at all to 5 = completely (Salvati et al., 2024). An example of an item was: “How important is religion to you?.” The final score was calculated by averaging the scores on the four items, and higher scores correspond to higher levels of religiosity.

Political orientation and political interest

Participants reported their own political orientation responding to a 7-point single item from 1 = Extremely Left to 7 = Extremely Right. Subsequently, participants responded to three items on a 5-point, Likert-type scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = completely, to measure their political interest (Salvati et al., 2019; 2023). An example of an item was “How interested are you in politics?.” The final score was calculated by averaging the scores on the three items, and higher scores correspond to higher levels of political interest.

Right-wing authoritarianism

(RWA, Altemeyer, 1996). The measure of RWA included 10 items to be rated on a 7-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = totally disagree to 7 = totally agree. An example of an item was “What our country really needs instead of more ‘civil rights’ is a good stiff dose of law and order.” The final score was calculated by averaging the scores on the ten items, and higher scores correspond to higher levels of RWA. The Italian version of the tool was already used in previous research conducted in Italy (i.e., Salvati et al., 2019; 2023, 2024).

Social dominance orientation

(SDO, Pratto et al., 2006). The measure of SDO included 8 items to be rated on a 7-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = totally disagree to 7 = totally agree. An example of an item was “It is right that some social groups occupy more relevant positions than others.” The final score was calculated by averaging the scores on the eight items, and higher scores correspond to higher levels of SDO. The Italian version of the tool was already used in previous research conducted in Italy (i.e., Salvati et al., 2019; 2023, 2024).

Traditional masculinity-femininity scale

(TMF, Kachel et al., 2016). The measure of TMF included 6 items to be rated on a 7-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = very feminine, to 7 = very masculine. An example of an item was “Traditionally, my behaviours could be considered as…” The final score was calculated by averaging the scores on the six items, and higher scores correspond to higher levels of traditional masculinity. The Italian version of the tool was already used in previous research conducted in Italy (i.e., Salvati et al., 2019; 2021; 2023).

Five-facet mindfulness questionnaire

(FFMQ, Baer et al., 2022). We used the short form of the FFMQ, which includes 3 items for each of the five facets: observe (e.g., “When I take a shower or bath, I pay attention to the sensations the water causes on my body”), describe (e.g., “I’m good at finding words to describe my feelings”), acting-with awareness (e.g., “I carry out jobs or tasks automatically, almost without being aware of what I am doing”), non judging of inner experience (e.g., “I believe that some of my thoughts are strange or wrong, and that I shouldn’t think that way”), non-reactivity to inner experience (e.g., “When I have stressful images or thoughts, I realize them and let them pass”). Thus, the scale comprises 15 items to be rated on a 5-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = never or very rarely true, to 5 = very often or always true. The total score for each of the five dimensions was calculated by averaging the scores on the three corresponding items, after reversing some, so that higher scores correspond to higher levels of dispositional mindfulness for that dimension. The Italian version of the tool was already used in previous research conducted in Italy (i.e., Chiorri et al., 2023).

Nonjudgmental regard towards others

(NRO, Nicol & De France, 2022). The NRO includes 11 items to be rated on a 5-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = never or very rarely true, to 5 = very often or always true. The measure consists of two subscales, Ideological Acceptance, which refers to judgments of a person’s actions, ideas, and personality (e.g., “I tend to evaluate whether other people’s opinions are right or wrong”) and Emotion Acceptance (e.g., “I accept other people openly expressing their emotions”), which refers to the acceptance of someone’s emotions and tendency to express their feelings. The total score for each dimension was calculated by averaging the scores on the corresponding items, after reversing some, so that higher scores correspond to higher levels of acceptance of the other’s experience. An ad-hoc Italian translation of this tool was made for the current research.

Modern homophobia scale

(MHS, Lingiardi et al., 2005). We used MHS to measure sexual prejudice against gay men (MHS-G version, α = 0.91, e.g., “Gay men should stop imposing their lifestyle on other people”) and lesbian women (MHS-L version, α = 0.91, e.g., “Many lesbian women use their sexual orientation to gain special privileges”). Both tools consist of 12 items to be rated on a 5-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = totally disagree, to 5 = totally agree. In the current study, a single final score of sexual prejudice was calculated by averaging the scores on the two versions, as already done in previous studies (Salvati et al., 2023).

Genderism and transphobia scale

(GTS, Scandurra et al., 2017). This tool includes 32 items to be rated on a 7-point, Likert-type scale, from 1 = totally disagree, to 5 = totally agree, which constitute two subscales, Genderism/Transphobia, which refers to the negative beliefs and emotions against trans*, cross-dressers, feminine men, and masculine women, that reinforce the negative evaluation of gender non-conformity (25 items, e.g., “Sex change operations are morally wrong”), and Gender Bashing, which refers to the assault and/or harassment of persons who do not conform to gender norms (7 items, e.g., “If I encountered a male who wore high-heeled shoes, stockings and makeup, I would consider beating him up”). The total score for each dimension was calculated by averaging the scores on corresponding items, after reversing some, so that higher scores correspond to higher levels of Genderism/Transphobia and Gender Bashing, respectively.

Plan of analyses

Following previous studies conducted on the relationships between dispositional mindfulness and sexual prejudice in male participants (Salvati et al., 2019) and female participants (Salvati & Chiorri, 2023), we decided to maintain the same analysis strategy, in order to better compare the results of the current study with the previous ones. Thus, we first performed zero-order correlations to preliminary explore the associations among the variables. We then conducted a dominance analysis (DA) to test the predictive power of the dispositional mindfulness dimensions and NRO dimensions on sexual prejudice, on the one hand, and on transphobia and gender bashing, on the other, after controlling for background variables, religiosity, political orientation and engagement, right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and adherence to traditional gender characteristics. All DA were even carried out with ‘exclusively heterosexual’ participants only. Given that the results did not show any substantial difference from those reported in this paper, we decided to include both ‘exclusively heterosexual’ and ‘predominantly heterosexual’ participants. On the one hand, we preferred to follow the same procedure as the previous studies that investigated the relationships between dispositional mindfulness and sexual prejudice, so that our results would be more comparable. On the other hand, we preferred not to lose statistical power, given the number of predictors present in the dominance analyses.

DA allows for a comprehensive segregation of the total variance in the response variable attributed to different predictors (Azen & Budescu, 2003). This method provides dominance weights for each predictor, derived through an iterative process of comparing the predictors in different regression models. This facilitates the assessment of the relative importance of each predictor. We explored the concept of general dominance, which provides insights into the extent to which a predictor contributes to the variance when considered alongside other predictors within a given set. This is analogous to Lindeman’s R2 contribution averaged across different orders of regressors and provides an R2-like measure of effect size. Given the unknown theoretical distribution of dominance weights (Azen & Budescu, 2003), we used bootstrapping to account for the random component in the regression models. This allowed us to establish confidence intervals for two purposes: first, to test whether a dominance weight was significantly different from zero, and second, to compare dominance weights within the same model.

To analyse the data, we used the “relaimpo” package (version 2.2-6) package in R, following the precedent set of precedent studies by Salvati et al. (2019; 2023). The results from the boot.relimp function were used to assess the bias in bootstrap-estimated parameters. To interpret the bias values, we used the standards set by Tonidandel et al. (2009), who consider 0.009 as a minor level of bias. A sufficiently low bias level implies that the sample size is adequate.

Results

Correlations

Correlational analyses (Table 2) provided initial support for our hypotheses, showing that both dimensions of nonjudgmental regard towards others, Emotional Acceptance (NRO-E) and Ideological Acceptance (NRO-I), were negatively associated with almost all of the prejudice measures in our study. Specifically, on the one hand, NRO-E was negatively associated with sexual prejudice (MHS), r = −.40, p <. 01, with gender bashing (GeBA), r = −.28, p <. 01, and with transphobia, r = −.41, p <. 01. On the other hand, NRO-I was negatively associated with GeBA, r = −.12, p <. 05, and with Transphobia, r = −.12, p <. 05, but not with MHS, r = −.04, p >. 05. The magnitudes of the associations with NRO-E were moderate/large, whereas the magnitudes of the associations with NRO-I were small.

Table 2 Correlations and descriptives (N = 911)
Full size table

Instead, the results showed that almost all the correlations between the five dimensions and the three prejudice measures were not statistically significant, with the exception of the ‘Observing’ facet (FF-O), which was negatively associated with MHS, r = −.21, p <. 01, with GeBA, r = −.12, p <. 01, and with transphobia, r = −.24, p <. 01, and except for the ‘Non-judging’ facet (FF-J), which was negatively associated only with GeBa, r = −.07, p <. 05. All effect sizes for these associations were small.

Bivariate correlations of the MHS with the potential predictors showed that higher levels of sexual prejudice against gay men and lesbian women were associated with male gender, higher age, lower educational levels (EDU), high religiosity (REL), right-wing political orientation, low levels of political engagement (POL), high right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), high social dominance orientation (SDO), and high adherence to traditional masculinity (TMF). The effect sizes of these associations ranged from small, r =|0.15|, p <.01, to large, r =|0.72|, p <.01.

Bivariate correlations of GeBa with potential predictors showed that higher levels of gender bashing were associated with male gender, lower EDU, high REL, right-wing political orientation, high RWA, high SDO, and high adherence to TMF. The effect sizes of these associations ranged from small, r =|0.08|, p <.05, to large, r =|0.50|, p <.01. Similarly, bivariate correlations of the Transphobia with potential predictors showed that higher levels of transphobia were associated with male gender, higher age, lower EDU, high REL, right-wing political orientation, low levels of POL, high RWA, high SDO, and high adherence to TMF. The effect sizes of these associations ranged from small, r =|0.11|, p <.01, to large, r =|0.67|, p <.01.

See Table 2 for all the specific correlations among the study variables.

Dominance analyses

Confirming the first prediction (H1), the first Dominance Analysis (DA) revealed that the variance in the sexual prejudice score (MHS) was accounted for by low levels of NRO-E, and low levels of FF-O, while no other mindful dimensions emerged as significant predictors of MHS (Fig. 1). Furthermore, DA confirmed that high levels of MHS were predicted by male gender, higher age, lower educational level, high religiosity (REL), right-wing political orientation, low levels of political engagement (POL), high right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), high social dominance orientation (SDO), and higher adherence to traditional masculinity (TMF).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Results of the dominance analysis for the Modern Homophobia Scale (MHS). Note. In this figure, the correlations computed on the actual dataset are shown, used for the specific Dominance Analysis, thus, they are listwise coefficients. Bracketed values show the lower and upper limits of the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval. Bolded values indicate that the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval does not include zero. r = Pearson’s correlation coefficient; DW = dominance weight; RWA: Right-Wing Authoritarianism; SDO: Social Dominance Orientation; TMF: Traditional Masculinity-Femininity Scale; FFMQ: Five-Factor Mindfulness Questionnaire (Self-Oriented dispositional mindfulness); NRO: Nonjudgmental Regard of Other

Full size image

Confirming H2a, the second DA revealed that the variance in gender bashing (GeBa) scores was accounted for by low levels of NRO-E, but not by any of the other dimensions of mindfulness (Fig. 2). Furthermore, DA confirmed that high levels of GeBa were predicted by male gender, right-wing political orientation, high levels of RWA, high levels of SDO, and higher adherence to traditional masculinity (TMF).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Results of the dominance analysis for Gender Bashing (GeBa). Note. In this figure, the correlations computed on the actual dataset are shown, used for the specific Dominance Analysis, thus, they are listwise coefficients. Bracketed values show the lower and upper limits of the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval. Bolded values indicate that the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval does not include zero. r = Pearson’s correlation coefficient; DW = dominance weight; RWA: Right-Wing Authoritarianism; SDO: Social Dominance Orientation; TMF: Traditional Masculinity-Femininity Scale; FFMQ: Five-Factor Mindfulness Questionnaire (Self-Oriented dispositional mindfulness); NRO: Nonjudgmental Regard of Other

Full size image

As for H2b, the last DA showed that the variance of the genderism/transphobia score was accounted for by low levels of NRO-E and low levels of FF-O, but not by the other dimensions of mindfulness (Fig. 3). Furthermore, DA confirmed that male gender, older age, lower educational levels, high levels of REL, right-wing political orientation, high levels of RWA, high levels of SDO, and higher adherence to traditional masculinity (TMF) predicted high levels of genderism/transphobia.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Results of the dominance analysis for Genderism/Transphobia. Note. In this figure, the correlations computed on the actual dataset are shown, used for the specific Dominance Analysis, thus, they are listwise coefficients. Bracketed values show the lower and upper limits of the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval. Bolded values indicate that the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval does not include zero. r = Pearson’s correlation coefficient; DW = dominance weight; RWA: Right-Wing Authoritarianism; SDO: Social Dominance Orientation; TMF: Traditional Masculinity-Femininity Scale; FFMQ: Five-Factor Mindfulness Questionnaire (Self-Oriented dispositional mindfulness); NRO: Nonjudgmental Regard of Other

Full size image

The absolute bias of the estimates ranged from 0.0001 to 0.0014 for MHS, from 0.0001 to 0.0015 for GeBA, and from 0.0001 to 0.0012 for transphobia, suggesting that the amount of bias was negligible and therefore the sample size could be considered as adequate.

Discussion

The results of the current study supported our hypotheses, confirming that high levels of dispositional mindfulness are associated with low levels of sexual prejudice against gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals and with low levels of genderism/transphobia and gender bashing against transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals. The current results also extended the findings from previous literature (Salvati et al., 2019; Salvati & Chiorri, 2023), showing that NRO is a significant predictor of intergroup bias in multiple regression models that also included mindfulness facets. Specifically, our results indicate that the facet that is most predictive of low levels of sexual prejudice, gender bashing, and transphobia is the awareness and acceptance of other people’s emotions and feelings. Such findings are consistent with the fact that non-judgmental regard towards others encourages individuals to be open, empathetic, and considerate in their interactions with others (Nicol & De France, 2022), whereas measures of self-oriented mindfulness may focus primarily on an individual’s self-awareness and self-regulation, without emphasising aspects related to interpersonal relationships as strongly (Baer et al., 2006).

At the same time, and in line with previous literature (Salvati et al., 2019; Salvati & Chiorri, 2023), the results showed that the mindful facet of observing one’s inner experience was also associated with low levels of sexual prejudice, gender bashing, and transphobia.

These relationships are particularly noteworthy and robust, as they are maintained even after netting out the effects of other socio-psychological variables that previous literature has found to be associated with sexual prejudice and transphobia, such as male gender, older age, low educational level, right-wing political orientation, high religiosity, traditional masculinity, high social dominance orientation, and high right-wing authoritarianism (Salvati & Chiorri, 2021; Salvati et al., 2019; 2023; Scandurra et al., 2017).

However, NRO Ideological Acceptance was not related to the measures of prejudice. Thus, prejudice against LGBTQ + people appeared to be better predicted by acceptance of others’ emotions and emotional expressions than by cognitive acceptance of others’ actions, ideas and personality. Previous research (Nicol & France, 2022), has found that while both Emotion Acceptance and Ideological Acceptance are associated with the personality dimension of agreeableness, which reflects a non-judgmental characteristic, NRO Emotion Acceptance is uniquely associated with openness to experience, which includes curiosity, imagination, and a desire for new experiences. Other research has confirmed that some of the facets of openness to experience (e.g., sensitivity and receptivity to inner processes, and the ability to create a pleasurable experiential world while rejecting social expectations) are negatively associated with prejudice (Ng et al., 2021). Other studies have also found that emotional responses based on affective empathy, more than cognitive empathy, facilitate the vicarious experience of others’ feelings, which in turn may promote empathic concern and prosocial behaviours (Habashi et al., 2016).

However, it is important to note that dispositional mindfulness is a distinct construct from empathy, although they may have some overlap, such as the awareness of the emotions and feelings. Empathy involves sharing and being affected by another’s emotions, understanding their reasons, and adopting their perspective, which involves more complex processes, compared to the dispositional mindfulness (De Waal, 2008). Empathy is essential for social cognition, enhancing our ability to understand and respond to the others’ emotions and to engage in prosocial behavior, often leading to emotional resonance and a sense of connection with another person (Spreng et al., 2009). Emotion Acceptance described a way of being open to others and deeply accepting of others’ feelings and emotions, avoiding labelling, judging or attributing. Confirming the predictions, in this study, both mindfulness and non-judgmental regard towards others’ emotions are associated with reduced sexual prejudice, transphobia and gender bashing in that different aspects of mindfulness can be seen as effective intrapersonal and interpersonal resources for coping with many challenging and novel emotions that arise in human interactions.

Limitations and further directions

The conclusions of the study appear to be justified by the results, but this should be further evaluated in the light of the limitations. First, given the cross-sectional nature of this study, it is not possible to draw causal inferences. Future studies could address this issue by incorporating a mindfulness manipulation within an experimental design or by adopting a longitudinal approach to better explore the causal-effect relationships with sexual prejudice and transphobia. Second, the use of self-report measures may have introduced a social desirability bias. Despite the anonymous and online administration, these effects may not have been fully mitigated. Third, it should be noted that the internal consistency of some scale scores was lower than the commonly accepted threshold of 0.70. This is somewhat inevitable as internal consistency increases with the number of items and the average inter-item correlation. At the same time, the lack of statistical significance of some associations may be due to the poor reliability of the measure. Indeed, measurement error is a well-known cause of lack of statistical power and can affect the estimation of correlation/regression coefficients. To address this issue, we also computed the correlation corrected for attenuation between FFMQ scales and the three criterion variables considered in this study. The differences we found do not appear to be very large, and they are greater for Observing, which emerged as a significant predictor despite the relatively low reliability.

Finally, the convenience sampling method used could be improved by using other sampling strategies. For instance, platforms such as Prolific or Amazon Turk could be used, as they are known to facilitate the recruitment of international and possibly more representative samples. Indeed, our sample was characterized by a gender imbalance in favour of women compared to men, and by a large presence of university students, which limits the generalizability of our results.

In addition, future studies could use the extended version of the FFMQ scale in addition to the NRO scale to observe the possible replication of this pattern of results. Future studies could also investigate the associations of self-related dispositional mindfulness with internalized transphobia in TGD individuals to extend the findings of previous literature focusing on the relationships between dispositional mindfulness and internalized sexual stigma in gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals (Salvati et al., 2019; Salvati & Chiorri, 2023). In this context, future studies on LGBTQ + people could also consider investigating the relationships between dispositional mindfulness and positive dimensions of LGBTQ + identity (Baiocco et al., 2018; Petrocchi et al., 2020).

From an applied perspective, it may be useful to consider mindfulness as an aspect to be enhanced in order to prevent forms of intolerance towards gender and sexual minority people, especially in school settings, as it has been shown to play a role in reducing various forms of prejudice (Fuochi et al., 2023). Both cognitive and emotional features of mindfulness should be trained, increasing awareness of both one’s own internal states and those of others. According to this, Cramwinckel et al. (2018) showed how blatant and subtle prejudice can be reduced in many ways, and the most promising ones seem to be those ones that include strategies to evoke empathy and perspective taking. Furthermore, interventions based on contact theory seem to be even more effective in reducing prejudice when they are combined with educational interventions for inclusion that promote perspective taking (Felten et al., 2015). Thus, future studies could use action research method to investigate whether prejudice against sexual and gender minority people can be reduced (Fuochi et al., 2023).

Conclusion

In conclusion, our study adds to the existing literature on the relationships between dispositional mindfulness and sexual prejudice and transphobia. On the other hand, the comprehensive understanding of how dispositional mindfulness is related to sexual prejudice and transphobia uncovered in this study has profound implications for social action and policy formulation. Indeed, studies such as this could help researchers, social psychologists, clinicians, and healthcare professionals to develop and implement more effective programs aimed at reducing sexual prejudice and transphobia in our societies and promoting inclusivity (Salvati et al., 2020). LGBTQ + people are still stigmatized in most of the social contexts at individual, interpersonal and structural levels, and this stigma and discrimination also has significant mental health implications for LGBTQ + people (Corrigan, 2004; Scandurra et al., 2017, 2019), as outlined by the minority stress model (Meyer, 2003). Mindfulness has positive effects on increasing well-being, reducing psychopathology and emotional reactivity, and improving behavioural regulation (see, e.g., Barcaccia et al., 2022).

Mindfulness training could be integrated into schools, workplaces, and community settings to reduce prejudice against LGBTQ + people by improving self-regulation and awareness of bias. Furthermore, such efforts could contribute to improving the mental health and overall well-being of individuals within the LGBTQ + community. The socio-political implications of such studies are different: they make it possible to understand the variables on which individuals’ psychosocial prejudice is based, and thus to hypothesize interventions aimed at promoting mindfulness as an educational approach to compensate for forms of discrimination against LGBTQ + people. Policy makers should be encouraged to allocate adequate resources to mindfulness-based programs, recognizing their potential value in contributing to building more tolerant societies and reducing social stigma.