Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

Adams, Henry E.; Wright, Lester W.; Lohr, Bethany A.

doi:10.1037/0021-843x.105.3.440

Cited by 218 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Over and above other contributing variables, being a man and espousing explicit antigay bias, as well as the interaction of the two, rendered a participant more likely to have a negative physiological reaction toward images of gay men. The results of the current study are in accord with an expanding body of evidence that supports the idea that men experience a physiological manifestation of antigay bias (e.g., Adams et al, 1996;Mahaffey et al, 2005;Shields & Harriman, 1984), but women do not.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…One problem with these findings is that heart rate detects physiological arousal, but does not provide affective valence. Adams, Wright, and Lohr (1996) measured penile tumescence in homophobic and non-homophobic male participants using penile plethysmography. Sexual arousal was measured while participants watched erotic videos of sex between a man and a woman, sex between two women, and sex between two men.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sex Differences in Affective Responses to Homoerotic Stimuli: Evidence for an Unconscious Bias Among Heterosexual Men, but not Heterosexual Women

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antigay bias is a well-documented social problem among heterosexual men, though heterosexual women display a lesser tendency toward this bias. Startle eye blink has been established as a valid measure of the affective component of antigay bias in heterosexual men. In the current study, a sample of 91 heterosexual women and 87 heterosexual men were exposed to a variety of sexual photographic stimuli accompanied by startle probes. Heterosexual men who expressed more bias against gay men using a social distance measure (i.e., discomfort with being in close quarters with a gay man) displayed a startle response consistent with greater negative affect (e.g., fear and disgust) toward gay male stimuli, while those with less self-reported antigay bias did not display a physiological bias against gay men, and none of these men showed a relationship between bias against lesbians and physiological responses while viewing lesbian images. There were no such physiological manifestations of antigay bias in heterosexual women while viewing lesbian or gay male images, even among those who self-reported such bias. It appears that heterosexual women do not tend to have the same affective response toward homosexuals that some heterosexual men experience.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in Affective Responses to Homoerotic Stimuli: Evidence for an Unconscious Bias Among Heterosexual Men, but not Heterosexual Women

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although we do not have evidence that our measure of homoerotic motivation actually predicts the extent to which individuals engage in same-sex sexual behavior, nonetheless, with the caveat that cultural norms undoubtedly shape the extent to which motivation translates into action, this is plausible given that those who are bisexual or homosexual (as indicated by the Kinsey scale) display greater homoerotic motivation on our scale. Homoerotic motivation is a necessary but not sufficient precursor to engaging in homoerotic behavior; however, it may well be the case that this motivation is not always experienced consciously (e.g., Adams, Wright, & Lohr, 1996).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the Affiliation Hypothesis of Homoerotic Motivation in Humans: The Effects of Progesterone and Priming

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The frequency of homoerotic behavior among individuals who do not identify as having an exclusively homosexual sexual orientation suggests that such behavior potentially has adaptive value. Here we define homoerotic behavior as intimate erotic contact between members of the same sex and affiliation as the motivation to make and maintain social bonds. Among both male and female nonhuman primates affiliation is one of the main drivers of homoerotic behavior.Correspondingly, in humans, both across cultures and across historical periods, homoerotic behavior appears to play a role in promoting social bonds. However, to date, the affiliation explanation of human homoerotic behavior has not been adequately tested experimentally. We developed a measure of homoerotic motivation with a sample of 244 men and women. Next, we found that, in women (n= 92), homoerotic motivation was positively associated with progesterone, a hormone that has been shown to promote affiliative bonding. Lastly, we explored the effects of affiliative contexts on homoerotic motivation in men (n=59), finding that men in an affiliative priming condition were more likely to endorse engaging in homoerotic behavior compared to those primed with neutral or sexual concepts, and this effect was more pronounced in men with high progesterone. These findings constitute the first experimental support for the affiliation account of the evolution of homoerotic motivation in humans.

show abstract

“…A recent study with genital plethysmography has breathed new life into the classic psychoanalytic theory of homophobia as a defense against threatening homosexual feelings ( Adams, Wright, & Lohr, 1996 ). Participants identified by questionnaire as homophobic, unlike nonhomophobic comparison participants, showed increases in penile circumference (indicating arousal) while exposed to sexually explicit videotapes showing male homosexual activity.…”

Section: Other Studies Documenting Unconscious Emotional Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: Toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science.

Westen

1998

Psychological Bulletin

342

233

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although commentators periodically declare that Freud is dead, his repeated burials lie on shaky grounds. Critics typically attack an archaic version of psychodynamic theory that most clinicians similarly consider obsolete. Central to contemporary psychodynamic theory is a series of propositions about (a) unconscious cognitive, affective, and motivational processes; (b) ambivalence and the tendency for affective and motivational dynamics to operate in parallel and produce compromise solutions; (c) the origins of many personality and social dispositions in childhood; (d) mental representations of the self, others, and relationships; and (e) developmental dynamics. An enormous body of research in cognitive, social, developmental, and personality psychology now supports many of these propositions. Freud's scientific legacy has implications for a wide range of domains in psychology, such as integration of affective and motivational constraints into connectionist models in cognitive science.Freud, like Elvis, has been dead for a number of years but continues to be cited with some regularity. Although the majority of clinicians report that they rely to some degree upon psychodynamic 1 principles in their work ( Pope, Tabachnick, & Keith-Spiegel, 1987 ), most researchers consider psychodynamic ideas to be at worst absurd and obsolete and at best irrelevant or of little scientific interest. In the lead article of a recent edition of Psychological Science, Crews (1996) arrived at a conclusion shared by many: " [T]here is literally nothing to be said, scientifically or therapeutically, to the advantage of the entire Freudian system or any of its component dogmas" (p. 63).Despite the explosion of empirical studies of unconscious cognitive processes (see, e.g., Greenwald, 1992 ;Kihlstrom, 1987 ;Schacter, 1992 ), few reference Freud; none cite any contemporary psychodynamic work; and in general, psychodynamic concepts are decreasingly represented in the major psychology journals ( Robins & Craik, 1994 ). The situation is similar in the popular media and in broader intellectual discourse. Publications ranging from Time to the New York Review of Books periodically publish Freud's intellectual obituary, with critics charging that Freud's ideas-such as his dual-instinct theory or his hypotheses about female personality development-are seriously out of date and without scientific merit (e.g., Crews, 1993 ).Many aspects of Freudian theory are indeed out of date, and they should be: Freud died in 1939, and he has been slow to undertake further revisions. His critics, however, are equally behind the times, attacking countenance was last sighted in earnest. Contemporary psychoanalysts and psychodynamic therapists no longer write much about ids and egos, nor do they conceive of treatment for psychological disorders as an archaeological expedition in search of lost memories ( Aron, 1996 ;Gabbard, 1994 ;Horowitz, 1988 ;Kolb, Cooper, & Fishman, 1995 ;Mitchell, 1988 ;Wachtel, 1993 ). People do sometimes describe feelings or behav...

show abstract

Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

Cited by 218 publications

References 16 publications

Sex Differences in Affective Responses to Homoerotic Stimuli: Evidence for an Unconscious Bias Among Heterosexual Men, but not Heterosexual Women

Sex Differences in Affective Responses to Homoerotic Stimuli: Evidence for an Unconscious Bias Among Heterosexual Men, but not Heterosexual Women

Testing the Affiliation Hypothesis of Homoerotic Motivation in Humans: The Effects of Progesterone and Priming

The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: Toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About