Predictors of Attitudes Towards Gay and Lesbian Couples Patrick J. Curme & Kerry S. Kleyman Metropolitan State University Abstract The current study seeks to predict attitudes and biases towards gay and lesbian prospective adoptive parents. Participants were given one of 20 scenarios about a proposed adoption and asked to judge the appropriateness of the adoption and the prospective parents. The study employed individual difference variables, including Social Dominance, Religious Fundamentalism, and Attitudes Towards Lesbians and Gay Men, as well as a novel “Homosexual-Blind Orientation Attitudes Scale” modeled after Neville’s Color-Blind Racial Attitudes Scale (Neville et al., 2000). The aim of the study was to better understand the underlying sources of prejudice towards gay and lesbian prospective adoptive parents, and offer perspectives on new avenues for research into the areas of unconscious biases and attitudes towards lesbian and gay couples who seek to become adoptive parents. Method Participants 254 individuals were recruited from a large Midwestern University and social media platforms (59% female, 41% male). The average age was 38. Materials Participants were presented with a survey taken in-person or on-line. Respondents were presented with a number of individual-differences measures as well as a novel Homosexual-Blind Orientation Attitudes Scale. Additionally, participants were randomly assigned one of 20 prospective adoption scenarios and asked a number of questions assessing their view of the appropriateness of the proposed adoption and the “best fit” of the prospective parents. Scales Used Attitudes Towards Lesbians and Gay Men (Herek, 1988) ATLG (L) α = .846 (10-items) ATLG (G) α = .871 (10-items) Religious Fundamentalism (Altemeyer, 2006), α = .854 (12-items) Social Dominance Orientation (Sidanius & Pratto, 2001), α = .844 (14-items) Homosexual-Blind Orientation Attitudes Scale (author constructed) First Factor (Heterosexual Privilege), α = .674 (5-items) Second Factor (Institutional Discrimination), α = .491 (2-items) Third Factor (Blatant Homosexual Issues), α = .802 (6-items) Results HSBA Validation Table 1 shows the regression model for HSBA Privilege, R = .472, R2 = .223. Table 2 shows the regression model for HSBA Blatant Homosexual Attitudes, R = .692, R2 = .479. Other Tests Figure 1 shows a significant interaction on couple by HSBA Blatant Homosexual Attitudes on family quality (i.e. This individual/couple does NOT have the right qualities that would enable them to raise a child - reversed), F(1,78) = 6.42, p = .013, η2 = .076 Table 3 shows the regression model for HSBA Blatant Homosexual Attitude as as predictor of the child growing up to have a “normal life”, R = .475, R2 = .225, F(3,76) = 7.369, p < .05. Introduction The need for adoptive parents in the U.S. is greater than ever; at the end of 2015, over 159,000 children were still waiting to be adopted from state agencies and had no permanent household (AFCARS, 2015). Increasingly, gay and lesbian couples have applied to become adoptive parents, and over 16,000 same-sex couples are raising an estimated 25,000 adopted children in the US (US Census, 2010). Additionally, over the last decade, rates of adoptive parenthood among gay and lesbian couples has nearly tripled (Gates, 2011). Despite these positive trends, LGBT prospective adoptive parents face numerous challenges to adopting, including state prohibitions, discriminatory adoption agency policies, and the personal prejudices and unconscious biases of the adoption agents and social workers. The current research investigates the underlying correlates of individuals’ biases against prospective gay and lesbian adoptive parents. Numerous examinations have demonstrated that adoption personnel exhibit unconscious biases and personal prejudices when deliberating a prospective adoption by a gay or lesbian individual or couple (Mallon, 2000; Spivey, 2006). As such, the current study employs a novel Homosexual-Blind Orientation Attitudes Scale (HSBA), modeled after Neville’s CoBRAS instrument, to illuminate participant’s unconscious orientation-blind attitudes and biases (Neville et al., 2004). Hypotheses H1: It is hypothesized that participants scoring high on the HSBA scale (i.e. biased) will be more likely to disapprove of LG adoptive parents. H2: It is hypothesized that participants with low HSBA scores (i.e. less biased) will be far more likely to assign positive “best fit scenario” scores to proposed adoptions by LG parents. Conclusion The present study ventures to build on the progress of previous studies of LGBT bias by predicting participant’s attitudes towards gay and lesbian couples in an adoption setting. The results of this examination demonstrates both the validity and utility of the newly-proposed HSBA scale (Homosexual-Blind Orientation Attitudes Scale) as a powerful instrument available for future analyses of LGBT prejudice and unconscious bias. As social attitudes change and public sentiments towards LGBT individuals and gay and lesbian parents continue to improve, it will become more challenging to uncover unconscious bias in respondents, as discrimination will become increasingly socially unacceptable. Researchers will need to find more robust and clever methods with which to survey participant’s true feelings towards these populations, which makes the potential usefulness of the HSBA scale all the more exciting. The results of the present study also suggest that the HSBA scale can be used in concert with other widely-used instruments (RF, SDO, ATLG) as a measure of validity and reliability. Additionally, it follows that the HSBA can be employed in examinations of LGBT bias housed in other areas besides adoption, including housing practices, workplace discrimination, and education. The limitation of the present study is that the HSBA scale has not endured additional tests of reliability and validity in other studies, so future research examinations should employ this instrument alongside other widely-used measures to confirm it’s utility. References Available upon request.