Heterogeneity in Attitude Responses: Evidence from Bostock v. Clayton County

Abstract

Traditional models of policy formation emphasize how political attitudes and actions affect policy outcomes. However, the converse may occur–policies are often a signal to constituents about the priorities and positions of both political actors and the government more broadly. I use the Supreme Court's decision in Bostock v. Clayton County to find broadbased improvements in attitudes toward LGBT people. Additionally, I find that my effect is almost entirely driven by men. These findings support a legitimization model of attitude effects. However, the distinct effects by gender suggest that gendered determinants of attitudes toward LGBT people may differ significantly.