Genetic and Environmental Influences on Individual Differences in Attitudes Toward Homosexuality: An Australian Twin Study

Previous research has shown that many heterosexuals hold negative attitudes toward homosexuals and homosexuality (homophobia). Although a great deal of research has focused on the profile of homophobic individuals, this research provides little theoretical insight into the aetiology of homophobia. To examine genetic and environmental influences on variation in attitudes toward homophobia, we analysed data from 4,688 twins who completed a questionnaire concerning sexual behaviour and attitudes, including attitudes toward homosexuality. Results show that, in accordance with literature, males have significantly more negative attitudes toward homosexuality than females and non-heterosexuals are less homophobic than heterosexuals. In contrast with some earlier findings, age had no significant effect on the homophobia scores in this study. Genetic modelling showed that variation in homophobia scores could be explained by additive genetic (36%), shared environmental (18%) and unique environmental factors (46%). However, corrections based on previous findings show that the shared environmental estimate may be almost entirely accounted for as extra additive genetic variance arising from assortative mating for homophobic attitudes. The results suggest that variation in attitudes toward homosexuality is substantially inherited, and that social environmental influences are relatively minor

Advances in Relative Deprivation Theory and Research

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York The focus of this special issue is relative deprivation (RD): the judgment that one or one’s group is worse off compared to some standard accompanied by feelings of anger and resentment. This collection of seven papers demonstrates the range of the new thinking and research about RD, and they include data from an impressive variety of participants—including Canadians (both French- and English-speakers), Dutch, the Maoris of New Zealand, Mongols, Singaporeans, and South Africans (both Blacks and Whites). These seven papers show that if RD, and its counterpart, relative gratification, are defined carefully, at the right level of analysis and employed within larger theoretical models, the concept offers invaluable insight to how people respond to often dramatic changes in their objective circumstances

Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to Experience, salience of intra-group differences, and performance of diverse groups.

This study examined how the performance of diverse teams is affected by member openness to experience and the extent to which team reward structure emphasizes intragroup differences. Fifty-eight heterogeneous four-person teams engaged in an interactive task. Teams in which reward structure converged with diversity (i.e., "faultline" teams) performed more poorly than teams in which reward structure cut across differences between group members or pointed to a "superordinate identity." High openness to experience positively influenced teams in which differences were salient (i.e., faultline and "cross-categorized" teams) but not teams with a superordinate identity. This effect was mediated by information elaboration

Is the left-right scale a valid measure of ideology? Individual-level variation in associations with "left" and "right" and left-right self-placement

In order to measure ideology, political scientists heavily rely on the so-called left-right scale. Left and right are, however, abstract political concepts and may trigger different associations among respondents. If these associations vary systematically with other variables this may induce bias in the empirical study of ideology. We illustrate this problem using a unique survey that asked respondents open-ended questions regarding the meanings they attribute to the concepts "left" and "right". We assess and categorize this textual data using topic modeling techniques. Our analysis shows that variation in respondents’ associations is systematically related to their self-placement on the left-right scale and also to variables such as education and respondents’ cultural background (East vs. West Germany). Our findings indicate that the interpersonal comparability of the left-right scale across individuals is impaired. More generally, our study suggests that we need more research on how respondents interpret various abstract concepts that we regularly use in survey questions

Outgroup favoritism: The role of power perception, gender, and conservatism

Current Research in Social Psychology13438-4