LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs and collective actions: Factors and processes that (de)motivate support for LGBTQ+ equality

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy Pub Date : 2025-02-15 DOI:10.1111/asap.70001
Valeria De Cristofaro, Mirco Costacurta, Valerio Pellegrini, Mauro Giacomantonio, Marco Salvati
{"title":"LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs and collective actions: Factors and processes that (de)motivate support for LGBTQ+ equality","authors":"Valeria De Cristofaro,&nbsp;Mirco Costacurta,&nbsp;Valerio Pellegrini,&nbsp;Mauro Giacomantonio,&nbsp;Marco Salvati","doi":"10.1111/asap.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent times are characterized by increased participation in collective action that either supports or opposes greater equality for LGBTQ+ individuals. In this research, we focus on the Italian context, where both forms of collective action are highly present, and examine the role of LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs (i.e., beliefs that a powerful LGBTQ+ lobby exist that operates secretly to pursue its plans against cis-heterosexual people and spread homosexuality in society) in (de)motivating heterosexual cisgender individuals’ mobilization. We conducted two correlational studies (<i>N</i> = 1266) and tested whether participants who endorse LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs would be less motivated to mobilize in support of LGBTQ+ rights, through decreased identification with LGBTQ+ people, lower anger for LGBTQ+ inequality, and lower group efficacy to achieve LGBTQ+ equality (Studies 1 and 2). In addition, we tested whether participants who endorse LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs would be more motivated to mobilize against LGBTQ+ rights, through increased identification with heterosexual people, higher anger for LGBTQ+ equality, and higher group efficacy to contrast LGBTQ+ equality (Study 2). Results of mediation analyses supported these predictions, indicating conspiracy beliefs about the LGBTQ+ community as a social-cognitive obstacle to the achievement of LGBTQ+ equality. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/asap.70001","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.70001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent times are characterized by increased participation in collective action that either supports or opposes greater equality for LGBTQ+ individuals. In this research, we focus on the Italian context, where both forms of collective action are highly present, and examine the role of LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs (i.e., beliefs that a powerful LGBTQ+ lobby exist that operates secretly to pursue its plans against cis-heterosexual people and spread homosexuality in society) in (de)motivating heterosexual cisgender individuals’ mobilization. We conducted two correlational studies (N = 1266) and tested whether participants who endorse LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs would be less motivated to mobilize in support of LGBTQ+ rights, through decreased identification with LGBTQ+ people, lower anger for LGBTQ+ inequality, and lower group efficacy to achieve LGBTQ+ equality (Studies 1 and 2). In addition, we tested whether participants who endorse LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs would be more motivated to mobilize against LGBTQ+ rights, through increased identification with heterosexual people, higher anger for LGBTQ+ equality, and higher group efficacy to contrast LGBTQ+ equality (Study 2). Results of mediation analyses supported these predictions, indicating conspiracy beliefs about the LGBTQ+ community as a social-cognitive obstacle to the achievement of LGBTQ+ equality. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Recent articles in ASAP have examined social psychological methods in the study of economic and social justice including ageism, heterosexism, racism, sexism, status quo bias and other forms of discrimination, social problems such as climate change, extremism, homelessness, inter-group conflict, natural disasters, poverty, and terrorism, and social ideals such as democracy, empowerment, equality, health, and trust.
期刊最新文献
LGBTQ+ conspiracy beliefs and collective actions: Factors and processes that (de)motivate support for LGBTQ+ equality Founder ownership and system-justifying beliefs in relation to perception toward Black Lives Matter and other social movements When longing goes wrong: Nostalgia can cause a preference for harmful aspects of the past Exploring disparities in research through the lens of epistemic exclusion: A focus on Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy Testing the interrelationship between area deprivation and ethnic disparities in sentencing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1