A Strategy for the Measurement of Homophobia

Hudson, Walter W.; Ricketts, Wendell

doi:10.1300/j082v05n04_02

Cited by 530 publications

(360 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

327

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…4 At the outset, a note about terminology is necessary. Hostility toward gay people has been labeled variously as homoerotophobia (Churchill, 1968), heterosexism (Morin & Garfinkle, 1978), homosexphobia (Levitt & Klassen, 1974), homosexism (Lehne, 1976), homonegativism (Hudson & Ricketts, 1980), anti-homosexualism (Hacker, 1971 and antihomosexuality (Klassen, Williams, & Levitt, 1989). The most widely used summary label for these attitudes is homophobia (Smith, 1971;Weinberg, 1972).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stigma, Prejudice, and Violence Against Lesbians and Gay Men

Herek¹

1991

Homosexuality: Research Implications for Public Policy

235

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stigma, Prejudice, and Violence Against Lesbians and Gay Men

Herek¹

1991

Homosexuality: Research Implications for Public Policy

235

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is a 25-item Likert scale that focuses on the affective responses and cognitions that individuals possess regarding gay men and lesbians. The original authors reported a Cronbach's alpha of 0.90 for the scale, with acceptable construct and factorial validity, and a very high content validity (Hudson and Ricketts, 1980). Its reliability and validity was re-established in other studies (Pain and Disney, 1995;Siebert et al, 2008).…”

Section: Instrument Index Of Attitudes Toward Homosexuals (Iath)mentioning

confidence: 94%

Reliability and validity of theMalay version of Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Men (MVATL/MVATG): A study on a group of medical students inMalaysia

Tan

Gill

et al. 2013

Asia-Pacific Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This study aims to examine the validity and reliability of the Malay version of Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Men (MVATL/ MVATG) among a group of medical students in Malaysia. Methods: It is a cross-sectional study of 173 medical students in the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The participants were given the MVATL/MVATG, Index of Attitudes toward Homosexuals (IATH), Homosexuality Attitude Scale (HAS) and the English version of Attitude toward Lesbians and Gay Men. Two weeks later, these students were given the MVATLG again. Results: Significant correlation was found between the individual scores of MVATL and MVATG with IATH and HAS in the results. The scale was able to differentiate Muslim and Non-Muslim subjects. The internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of both the MVATL and MVATG were good, at 0.76 and 0.82, respectively. The parallel form reliability (Pearson's correlation) of MVATL was 0.0.73 and 0.74 for MVATG. The test-retest reliability of MVATL/MVATG was good (Intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.67 for MVATL and 0.60 for MVATG). Discussion: The MVATLG demonstrated good psychometric properties in measuring attitudes toward homosexuality among a group of medical students in Malaysia and it could be used as a simple instrument on young educated Malaysian adults.

show abstract

“…Attitudes toward LGBT people was assessed through an adapted version of the Index of Attitudes Towards Homosexuals (IATH; Hudson & Rickets, 1980), a 25-item self-rated standardised measure of attitude towards non-heterosexual people, in which participants respond to statements on a 7-point Likert scale, with higher scores reflecting a more positive attitude. Twenty items from the IATH were included in the present study (six were excluded as they were considered outdated or inappropriate or repeated items in other measures).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%