Department of Behavioral Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Int J Psychol. 2013;48(5):891-9. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2012.713107. Epub 2012 Aug 31.
We examined levels of, and reasons for, anti-gay and anti-lesbian prejudice (homophobia) in pre-service physical education (PE) and non-physical education (non-PE) university students. Participants (N = 409; 66% female; N = 199 pre-service physical educators) completed questionnaires assessing anti-gay and lesbian prejudice, authoritarianism, social dominance orientation (SDO), physical/athletic identity and self-concept, and physical attributes. ANCOVAs revealed that PE students had higher levels of anti-gay (p = .004) and lesbian prejudice than non-PE students (p = .008), respectively. Males reported greater anti-gay prejudice (p < .001), but not anti-lesbian prejudice, than females. Authoritarian aggression was positively associated with greater anti-gay (β = .49) and lesbian prejudice (β = .37) among male participants. Among females, higher authoritarian aggression and SDO was associated with greater anti-gay (β = .34 and β = .25, respectively) and lesbian (β = .26 and β = .16, respectively) prejudice. The physical identity-related constructs of athletic self-concept (β = .-15) and perceived upper body strength (β = .39) were associated with anti-gay attitudes among male participants. Physical attractiveness (β = -.29) and upper body strength (β = .29) were also associated with male participants' anti-lesbian prejudice. Regression analyses showed that the differences between PE and non-PE students in anti-gay and lesbian prejudice were largely mediated by authoritarianism and SDO. The present study is the first to examine the relationship between investment in physical/sporting identity and attributes and anti-gay and lesbian prejudice in PE/sport participants. In the present sample, anti-gay and lesbian prejudice was greater in pre-service PE students than non-PE students, but these differences appear to be explained by differences in conservative ideological traits. Additionally, physical identity and athletic attributes based around masculine ideals also appear to contribute to this prejudice in males.
我们研究了职前体育教育(PE)和非体育教育(非 PE)大学生的反同和反同性恋偏见(恐同)水平和原因。参与者(N=409;女性占 66%;N=199 名职前体育教育工作者)完成了评估反同性恋和反同性恋偏见、专制主义、社会支配倾向(SDO)、身体/运动身份和自我概念以及身体属性的问卷。协方差分析显示,PE 学生的反同性恋(p=0.004)和反女同性恋偏见(p=0.008)水平均高于非 PE 学生。男性报告的反同性恋偏见(p<0.001)大于女性,但反女同性恋偏见则不然。专制攻击性与男性参与者的更大的反同性恋(β=0.49)和反女同性恋偏见(β=0.37)呈正相关。在女性中,较高的专制攻击性和 SDO 与更大的反同性恋(β=0.34 和β=0.25)和反女同性恋偏见(β=0.26 和β=0.16)相关。与身体身份相关的运动自我概念(β=-15)和感知上半身力量(β=0.39)与男性参与者的反同性恋态度相关。身体吸引力(β=-0.29)和上半身力量(β=0.29)也与男性参与者的反女同性恋偏见相关。回归分析表明,PE 和非 PE 学生在反同性恋和女同性恋偏见方面的差异主要由专制主义和 SDO 介导。本研究首次检验了在体育/运动参与者中身体/运动身份和属性与反同性恋和女同性恋偏见之间的关系。在本样本中,职前体育教育学生的反同性恋和反女同性恋偏见比非体育教育学生更大,但这些差异似乎可以用保守的意识形态特征的差异来解释。此外,以男性理想为基础的身体身份和运动属性似乎也导致了男性的这种偏见。