1. Discussion Tattooed targets were rated more negatively than non-tattooed targets. Conservative students and more religious community members rated the tattooed targets most negatively. The negative attributes placed on tattooed individuals may lead to discrimination and the reinforcement of structural stigma. In the student sample, conservative participants rated the tattooed targets more negatively than participants with moderate or liberal political orientations, possibly because conservatives tend to hold more traditional values that would be violated by the presence of tattoos. In the mTurk sample, higher religiosity was associated with more negative ratings of tattooed females, but not tattooed males. Prejudice against women with tattoos may stem from sexist beliefs based on tattooed females’ violation of traditional gender norms (Hawkes et al., 2004). Individuals with more traditional social identities (i.e., political orientation, religion) may be more likely to uphold traditional social role norms, especially for women, and disprove of violations of those norms through permanently marking the body with ink. Stigma associated with tattoo ownership still exists, despite the prevalence of tattoos in modern culture. Perceptions of negative characteristics of tattooed people may lead others to generalize tattooed attributes to undesirable personality qualities and create the expectation that all tattooed individuals possess undesirable qualities. Results In the student sample, tattooed individuals were rated more negatively than the non-tattooed, F(1, 108) = 24.34, p <.001, η 2 =.05 (see Figure 1), and male targets were rated more negatively than female targets, F(1, 108) = 70.90, p <.001, η 2 =.13. Conservatives (M= 4.32) rated the tattooed stimuli more negatively than liberals (M= 4.15) or moderates (M= 3.97), F(2, 108) = 3.60, p =.031, η 2 =.01. There were no significant effects of religious identity on the stimulus ratings (p =.99, η 2 =.009), and religiosity was not significantly correlated with any of the stimulus ratings. In the mTurk sample, tattooed stimuli were rated more negatively than the stimuli with tattoos digitally removed, F(1, 82) = 8.31, p =.005, η 2 =.03 (see Figure 2), and target males were rated more negatively than target females, F(1, 82) = 52.46, p <.001, η 2 =.13. There were no significant effects of religious identity (p =.62, η 2 =.002) or political orientation (p =.26, η 2 =.03). Those who reported greater religiosity rated the tattooed women more negatively than those with lower religiosity (Table 1). Introduction Tattoos are fairly common in the United States, but tattoos historically and at present are often associated with criminality and deviant behavior. Tattoos represent a public, structural stigma (Reeder & Pryor, 2008), in that stereotypes about tattooed individuals, such as that they are promiscuous (Swami, 2011) or criminal (Miller, Nichols, & Eure, 2009), are socially shared and accepted. People view tattooed individuals as possessing a number of negative character attributes, including being less intelligent, less trustworthy, less friendly, less agreeable, more neurotic, less conscientious (Wohlrab, Fink, Kappeler, & Brewer, 2009), likely drug users (Dickson, Dukes, Smith, & Strapko, 2014; Swami, 2011), and likely to engage in criminal behavior (Dickson et al., 2014). Women with tattoos are judged more negatively than women without tattoos by both men and women, possibly due to sexist beliefs based on tattooed females’ violation of traditional gender norms (Hawkes, Senn, & Thorn, 2004). We hypothesized that Tattooed stimuli would be judged more negatively than non-tattooed stimuli Participants who identify with groups that emphasize traditional values (i.e., conservative political orientation and high religiosity) would rate tattooed individuals more negatively on character attributions than participants who identify with less traditional social groups. Branded: The Influence of Social Identities on Judgments of Tattooed Individuals Branded: The Influence of Social Identities on Judgments of Tattooed Individuals Kristin A. Broussard & Helen C. Harton University of Northern Iowa Presented at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology Conference 2015 Contact Information: broussak@uni.edu; harton@uni.edu Table 1 Correlations of Religiosity and Ratings of Stimuli References Dickson, L., Dukes, R., Smith, H., & Strapko, N. (2014). Stigma of ink: Tattoo attitudes among college students. The Social Science Journal, 51, 268-276. doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2014.02.005 Hawkes, D., Senn, C. Y., & Thorn, C. (2004). Factors that influence attitudes toward women with tattoos. Sex Roles, 50, 593-604. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000027564.83353.06 Miller, B. K., McGlashan Nicols, K., & Eure, J. (2009). Body art in the workplace: Piercing the prejudice? Personnel Review, 38, 621-640. doi: 10.1108/00483480910992247 Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. (1958). The measurement of meaning. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Swami, V. (2011). Marked for life? A prospective study of tattoos on appearance anxiety and dissatisfaction, perceptions of uniqueness, and self-esteem. Body Image, 8, 237-244. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2011.04.005 Wohlrab, S., Fink, B., Kappeler, P. M., & Brewer, G. (2009). Differences in personality attributions toward tattooed and nontattooed virtual human characters. Journal of Individual Differences, 30, 1-5. doi:10.1027/1614-0001.30.1.1 12345 1.Religiosity1-.04-.002-.05.01 2. Mean Rating Tattooed Men-.181.44 **.12.20* 3. Mean Rating Tattooed Women-.23 *.62 ** 1-.04.46** 4. Mean Rating Non-Tattooed Women-.001.34 **.32 ** 1-.02 5. Mean Rating Non-Tattooed Men-.04.36 **.50 **.16 ** 1 Note: Correlations above the center are for the student sample and correlations below the center are the mTurk sample. *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Coefficients in red are significantly different between samples below the p<.05 level. mTurk Sample: Ratings of Stimuli by Political Orientation and Religious Identity Figure 2 Note: Error bars represent standard error. Student Sample: Ratings of Stimuli by Political Orientation and Religious Identity Figure 1 Note: Error bars represent standard error. Method Participants: 105 mTurk workers (M age = 42.69, SD age = 14.5); 56% female, 73.3% White 142 students (M age = 19.2, SD age = 1.44); 63.4% female, 90.1% White Procedure: Images of young men and women with large arm tattoos; tattoos digitally removed (see examples below) Participants rated four target photographs (2 men, 2 women; with/without tattoos) using a Semantic Differential scale (e.g., Good-Bad, Honest- Dishonest; Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1958) Self-reported religious affiliation (recoded as any religion versus “none” or “atheist/agnostic”), religiosity, political orientation (recoded as liberal, moderate, conservative). Abstract Participants rated images of people with tattoos and with their tattoos digitally removed. Tattooed targets were rated more negatively than non-tattooed targets. Conservative and religious participants rated tattooed targets most harshly. Tattoos may stigmatize people and lead to stereotyped judgments about them.