1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 嫌惡型男同性戀歧視：情境規範與訊息順序的影響
Aversive gay male discrimination: the impact of context norm and order effect
作者 鄭旭博
Cheng, Hsu Po
貢獻者 李怡青
Lee, I Ching
鄭旭博
Cheng, Hsu Po
關鍵詞 嫌惡型歧視
男同性戀
情境規範
順序效果
情感錯誤歸因程序
Aversive discrimination
gay male
context norm
order effect
Affect Misattribution Procedure
AMP
日期 2013
上傳時間 1-Nov-2013 11:45:45 (UTC+8)
摘要 目前國內對同性戀的態度似乎日益正面，但同性戀歧視的事件仍層出不窮，顯示探討影響同性戀歧視因素的重要性。本論文擬探討過往學者較少關注的因素，即情境對歧視同性戀者的影響。本論文探討兩種情境：缺少明確行為準則的情境與訊息呈現不同順序的情境。根據過去研究種族歧視的學者對嫌惡型歧視（Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986）的探討，他們主張嫌惡型歧視者只有當情境缺少明確行為準則時，才會表現出對特定族群的負面行為（即歧視）。由於黑人族群與同志族群有些共通點，本論文根據嫌惡型歧視理論假設：缺乏明確行為準則的情境容易引發對同性戀者的歧視。除此之外，延伸嫌惡型歧視理論的看法，本論文嫌惡型歧視者雖信奉族群平等，卻無法控制其未意識到的負面情緒，而較容易受到情境中訊息呈現順序的影響（Krosnick, 1999）。當訊息呈現順序加強族群間對立，或凸顯族群特性，就會造成歧視行為（McConahay, 1983; Wilson, 2010）。研究一以實驗法操弄多位目標人物的職業與性傾向以及人物呈現順序，預期在評價刻板印象中同性戀不適合的職業（老師）時，參與者會因為缺乏工作平等對待的行為準則，降低對同性戀工作者的工作評價，不過未獲得支持證據。訊息呈現順序效果則發現支持證據，若先評異性戀再評同性戀，會引發群際比較，降低對同性戀的評價。研究二改採判決目標人物是否有罪的情境，以犯罪證據是否矛盾操弄情境是否有明確準則，並同樣操弄性傾向呈現順序，加入態度內隱測驗以分辨嫌惡型歧視者與無歧視者。研究二符合預期，發現在證據矛盾時才會認為同性戀有罪程度高於比異性戀，證據相符時則否。性傾向呈現順序則重複驗證研究一發現。本論文延伸嫌惡型歧視理論以瞭解對男同性戀的歧視，並發現特定訊息呈現順序可能引發男同性戀歧視行為，這些結果可以提供發展性別平等教育方案，以有效降低這些歧視行為，促進社會平等。
In Taiwan, people’s attitudes toward gay men and lesbians have become more and more positive. However, gay men and lesbians are still suffer discrimination, suggesting that it is important to study the causes of discrimination against gay men and lesbians. In this thesis, I investigated the impact of context on discrimination against gay men because 1) gay men suffer more hostile and overt discrimination than lesbians and 2) impact of context is rarely studied. I targeted two kinds of context: context norm and information order. According to aversive racism theory (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986), individuals may discriminate against a person when they do not have to follow a norm. Thus, I hypothesized that people discriminate gay men only when there is no specific norm to follow. Furthermore, I applied the basic principle underlying aversive racism theory to order effect. That is, according to aversive racism theory, individuals may believe in social equality but may discriminate when they have no control over their negative emotions unconsciously aroused by some subordinate group member (e.g., Blacks). Because it is not possible for individuals to be aware of the order effect (Krosnick, 1999), I hypothesized that individuals may discriminate against gay men when the information order makes intergroup comparisons salient (McConahay, 1983; Wilson, 2010). In Study 1, I manipulated the target person’s job title and sex orientation, expecting that when the job was generally considered unsuitable for gay men, participants might believe that equal employment rights did not apply to gay men. As a result, they derogated against gay men. The result was not substantiated. However, I did find supporting evidence for the order effect. When judging a heterosexual male applicant before a gay male applicant, intergroup comparisons became salient, people would derogate against the gay male applicant. In Study 2, I adopted a crime judgment paradigm to address several potential problems in Study 1. I also applied the affect misattribution procedure to measure participants’ implicit attitude against gay men. This procedure allows me to distinguish aversive discriminators from non-discriminators. The results were consistent with the hypotheses derived from aversive racism theory. Participants derogated against a gay male suspect only when there was no consistent evidence in a criminal case; they treated a gay male suspect and a heterosexual male suspect equally when there was consistent evidence. Also, when participants judged a heterosexual male suspect before a gay male suspect, they would consider the gay male suspect to be guiltier than the heterosexual male suspect. The findings extend aversive racism theory to the understanding of discrimination against gay men and in the context of information order that makes intergroup comparisons salient. With the knowledge of context effects on discrimination against gay men, we are able to develop education programs for gender equality and offer insight on how to best guard against discrimination against gay men so that social equality may become possible.
參考文獻 吳翠松（2001）。報紙中的同志--十五年來同性戀議題報導的解析。收錄於何春蕤（主編），同志研究（頁89-116）。台北：巨流。
高松景、晏涵文、劉洁心（2004）。台北市中小學「兩性平等教育」評量之縱貫性研究。臺灣性學學刊，10，1-17。
陳雅伶（2007）。大學生性別角色刻板印象與對同性戀態度之相關研究。國立臺南大學諮商與輔導學系，碩士論文，未出版，台南市。
塗沅澂（2002）。個體對同性戀所持態度之外顯測量與內隱測量比較。輔仁大學心理學系，碩士論文，未出版，台北縣。
趙子揚（2006）。單純曝光效果：外顯與內隱測量。國立中正大學心理學系，碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。
顏甫珉（2007年10月13日）。OUT雜誌票選台北市對同志最友善。聯合報，A10版。
孫蒨如、陳婉榕（2012）。關係脈絡思考及個人脈絡思考對印象形成歷程的影響。本土心理學研究，37，1-56。
Aberson, C. L. (2003). Aversive bias toward gay men? Current Research in Social Psychology, 8, 266-274.
Aberson, C. L., Swan, D. J., & Emerson, E. P. (1999). Covert discrimination against gay men by U.S. college students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 323-334.
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Angermeyer, M.C., Matschinger, H. (2004).The Stereotype of Schizophrenia and Its Impact on Discrimination Against People With Schizophrenia: Results From a Representative Survey in Germany. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 1049-1061.
Ashmore, R. D., & Del Boca, F. K. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotyping. In Hamilton, D. L. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 1-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ben-Ari, A. (1995). The discovery that an offspring is gay: Parents’, gay men’s and lesbians’ perspectives. Journal of Homosexuality, 30, 89-112.
Berrill, K. T. (1990). Anti-gay violence and victimization in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 274-294.
Cuenot, R. G., & Fugita, S. S. (1982). Perceived homosexuality: Measuring heterosexual attitudinal and nonverbal reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 100-106.
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.
Fazio, R. H.(1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 75-109). New York: Academic Press.
Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013-1027.
Feagin, J. R., & Eckberg, D. L. (1980). Discrimination: Motivation, Action, Effects, and Context. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 1-20.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1977). The subtlety of White racism, arousal, and helping behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 691-707.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (Ed.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 61-89). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2005). Understanding and addressing contemporary racism: From aversive racism to the common ingroup identity model. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 615-639.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E. & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
Gurwitz, S. B., & Marcus, M. (1978). Effects of anticipated interaction, sex, and homosexual stereotypes on first impressions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8, 47-56.
Haddock, G, Zanna, M. P., & Esses, V. M. (1993). Assessing the structure of prejudicial attitudes: The case of attitudes toward homosexuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1105-1118.
Herek, G.M. (1988). Heterosexuals` attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. The Journal of Sex Research, 25, 451-477.
Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals` attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In Greene, B. & Herek, G. M. (Ed.) Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications.Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay issues, Vol. 1. (pp. 206-228) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Herek, G. M. (2000). Sexual prejudice and gender: do heterosexuals` attitudes toward lesbians and gay men differ? Journal of Social Issues, 56, 251–266.
Herek, G. M. (2004). Beyond “homophobia”: Thinking about sexual prejudice and stigma in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1, 6-24.
Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999). Sex differences in how heterosexuals think about lesbians and gay men: Evidence from survey context effects. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 348-360.
Hertrick, E. S., & Martin, A. D. (1987). Developmental issues and their resolution for gay and lesbian adolescents. Journal of Homosexuality, 14, 25-43.
Hodson, G., Hooper, H., Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2005). Aversive racism in Britain: the use of inadmissible evidence in legal decisions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 437-448.
Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: Ingroup preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 629-642.
Karlins, M., Coffman, T., & Walters, G. (1969). On the fading of social stereotypes: Studies in three generations of college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 1-16.
Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and american value conflict: correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55,893-905.
Katz, I., Wackenhut, J., & Hass, R. G. (1986). Racilal ambivalence, value duality, and behavior. In Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (Ed.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 35-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Kimmel, M. (1994). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity. In Brod, H.& Kaufman, M. (Eds.), Theorizing masculinities (pp. 119-141). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Kite, M. E., & Whitley, B. E. Jr. (1998). Do heterosexual women and men differ in their attitudes toward homosexuality? A conceptual and methodological analysis. In Herek, G. M. (Ed. ), Stigma and Sexual Orientation (pp. 39-61). London, ND: Sage Publication.
Krosnick, J.A. (1999). Survey research. Annual review of psychology, 50, 537-567.
McConahay, J. B. (1983). Modern racism and modern discrimination the effects of race, racial attitudes, and context on simulated hiring decisions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 551-558.
Meyer, I. H. (2007). Prejudice and Discrimination as Social Stressors. In Meyer, I. H., & Northridge, M. E. (Ed.), The Health of Sexual Minorities (pp. 242-267). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. New York, NY: Springer.
Morin, S. F., & Garfinkle, E. M. (1978). Male homophobia. Journal of Social Issues, 34, 29-47.
Morrison, M. A., & Morrison, T. G. (2002). Development and validation of a scale measuring modern prejudice toward gay men and lesbian women. Journal of Homosexuality, 43, 15-37.
Myrdal, G. (1944). An American dilemma. New York: Harper.
Payne, B. K., Cheng, C. M., Govorun, O. & Stewart, B. D., (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277-293.
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531-554.
Rokeach, M. & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989) Stability and change in American value priorities, 1968–1981. American Psychologist, 44, 775-784.
Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. London: Academic Press.
Schutz, H., & Six, B. (1996). How strong is the relationship between prejudice and discrimination? A meta-analytic answer. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 441-462.
Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (1992). Context effects in social and psychological research. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Shidlo, A. (1994). Internalized homophobia: Conceptual and empirical issues in measurement. In Greene, B, Herek, G. M. (Eds), Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 176-205). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Simon, A. (1998). The relation between stereotyoes of and attitudes toward lesbian and gays. In Herek, G. M. (Ed. ), Stigma and Sexual Orientation (pp. 62-81). London, ND: Sage Publication.
Son Hing, L. S., Chung-Yan, G. A., Grunfeld, R., Robichaud, L. K., & Zanna, M. P. (2005). Exploring the discrepancy between implicit and explicit prejudice. In Forgas, J. P., Williams, K. D., Laham, S. M. (Eds.), Social motivation: Conscious and unconscious processes (pp. 274-293). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Stangor, C., Sullivan, L. A., & Ford, T. E. (1991). Affective and Cognitive Determinants of Prejudice. Social Cognition, 9, 359-380.
Talley, A. E. & Bettencourt, B. A. (2008). Evaluations and aggression directed at a gay male target: the role of threat and antigay prejudice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 647–683.
Taylor, D. G., Sheatsley, P. B. & Greeley, A. M. (1978). Attitudes toward racial integration. Scientific American, 238, 42-49.
Tourangeau, R., & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 299-314.
United Nations. (2011, November). Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. Retrieved September 15, 2012, from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/19session/a.hrc.19.41_english.pdf.
Walls, N. E. (2008). Toward a multidimensional understanding of heterosexism: the changing nature of prejudice. Journal of Homosexuality, 55, 20-70.
Wilson, D. C. (2010). Perceptions about the amount of interracial prejudice depend on racial group membership and question order. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 344-356.
Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitude. Psychological Review, 107, 101-126.
Yen, CF , Pan, SM, Hou, SY, Liu, HC, Wu, SJ, Yang, WC, & Yang, HH. (2007). Attitudes toward gay men and lesbians and related factors among nurses in Southern Taiwan. Public Health, 121, 73-79.
Zanna, M. P. (1994). On the nature of prejudice. Canadian Psychology, 35, 11-23.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
心理學研究所
98752003
102
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098752003
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 李怡青zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Lee, I Chingen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 鄭旭博zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Cheng, Hsu Poen_US
dc.creator (作者) 鄭旭博zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Cheng, Hsu Poen_US
dc.date (日期) 2013en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Nov-2013 11:45:45 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Nov-2013 11:45:45 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Nov-2013 11:45:45 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0098752003en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/61502-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 心理學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 98752003zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 102zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 目前國內對同性戀的態度似乎日益正面，但同性戀歧視的事件仍層出不窮，顯示探討影響同性戀歧視因素的重要性。本論文擬探討過往學者較少關注的因素，即情境對歧視同性戀者的影響。本論文探討兩種情境：缺少明確行為準則的情境與訊息呈現不同順序的情境。根據過去研究種族歧視的學者對嫌惡型歧視（Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986）的探討，他們主張嫌惡型歧視者只有當情境缺少明確行為準則時，才會表現出對特定族群的負面行為（即歧視）。由於黑人族群與同志族群有些共通點，本論文根據嫌惡型歧視理論假設：缺乏明確行為準則的情境容易引發對同性戀者的歧視。除此之外，延伸嫌惡型歧視理論的看法，本論文嫌惡型歧視者雖信奉族群平等，卻無法控制其未意識到的負面情緒，而較容易受到情境中訊息呈現順序的影響（Krosnick, 1999）。當訊息呈現順序加強族群間對立，或凸顯族群特性，就會造成歧視行為（McConahay, 1983; Wilson, 2010）。研究一以實驗法操弄多位目標人物的職業與性傾向以及人物呈現順序，預期在評價刻板印象中同性戀不適合的職業（老師）時，參與者會因為缺乏工作平等對待的行為準則，降低對同性戀工作者的工作評價，不過未獲得支持證據。訊息呈現順序效果則發現支持證據，若先評異性戀再評同性戀，會引發群際比較，降低對同性戀的評價。研究二改採判決目標人物是否有罪的情境，以犯罪證據是否矛盾操弄情境是否有明確準則，並同樣操弄性傾向呈現順序，加入態度內隱測驗以分辨嫌惡型歧視者與無歧視者。研究二符合預期，發現在證據矛盾時才會認為同性戀有罪程度高於比異性戀，證據相符時則否。性傾向呈現順序則重複驗證研究一發現。本論文延伸嫌惡型歧視理論以瞭解對男同性戀的歧視，並發現特定訊息呈現順序可能引發男同性戀歧視行為，這些結果可以提供發展性別平等教育方案，以有效降低這些歧視行為，促進社會平等。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) In Taiwan, people’s attitudes toward gay men and lesbians have become more and more positive. However, gay men and lesbians are still suffer discrimination, suggesting that it is important to study the causes of discrimination against gay men and lesbians. In this thesis, I investigated the impact of context on discrimination against gay men because 1) gay men suffer more hostile and overt discrimination than lesbians and 2) impact of context is rarely studied. I targeted two kinds of context: context norm and information order. According to aversive racism theory (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986), individuals may discriminate against a person when they do not have to follow a norm. Thus, I hypothesized that people discriminate gay men only when there is no specific norm to follow. Furthermore, I applied the basic principle underlying aversive racism theory to order effect. That is, according to aversive racism theory, individuals may believe in social equality but may discriminate when they have no control over their negative emotions unconsciously aroused by some subordinate group member (e.g., Blacks). Because it is not possible for individuals to be aware of the order effect (Krosnick, 1999), I hypothesized that individuals may discriminate against gay men when the information order makes intergroup comparisons salient (McConahay, 1983; Wilson, 2010). In Study 1, I manipulated the target person’s job title and sex orientation, expecting that when the job was generally considered unsuitable for gay men, participants might believe that equal employment rights did not apply to gay men. As a result, they derogated against gay men. The result was not substantiated. However, I did find supporting evidence for the order effect. When judging a heterosexual male applicant before a gay male applicant, intergroup comparisons became salient, people would derogate against the gay male applicant. In Study 2, I adopted a crime judgment paradigm to address several potential problems in Study 1. I also applied the affect misattribution procedure to measure participants’ implicit attitude against gay men. This procedure allows me to distinguish aversive discriminators from non-discriminators. The results were consistent with the hypotheses derived from aversive racism theory. Participants derogated against a gay male suspect only when there was no consistent evidence in a criminal case; they treated a gay male suspect and a heterosexual male suspect equally when there was consistent evidence. Also, when participants judged a heterosexual male suspect before a gay male suspect, they would consider the gay male suspect to be guiltier than the heterosexual male suspect. The findings extend aversive racism theory to the understanding of discrimination against gay men and in the context of information order that makes intergroup comparisons salient. With the knowledge of context effects on discrimination against gay men, we are able to develop education programs for gender equality and offer insight on how to best guard against discrimination against gay men so that social equality may become possible.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 男同性戀歧視：探討情境對異性戀知覺者的影響 1
刻板印象、偏見與歧視 1
對同性戀偏見與歧視行為 2
影響歧視行為展現的情境因素 5
一）缺少明確行為準則的情境 6
二）訊息呈現順序 12
預試一 17
研究方法 17
研究參與者 17
研究材料 17
研究程序 18
研究結果 18
研究一 19
研究方法 20
研究參與者 20
研究設計 20
研究材料 20
研究程序 21
研究結果 22
討論 23
預試二 26
研究方法 26
研究參與者 26
研究材料 26
研究結果 27
預試三 29
研究方法 29
研究參與者 29
選圖標準 29
研究材料 29
研究結果與討論 30
研究二 33
研究方法 33
研究參與者 33
研究設計 34
研究材料 34
研究程序 35
研究結果 36
操弄檢核 36
假設檢驗 36
討論 39
綜合討論 41
參考資料 46

表格目錄
表1：順序效果假設整理 16
表2：證據可信度、量刑重要性 27
表3：不同族群的犯罪可能性 28
表4：情色灰階圖片的裸露程度、親密程度與構圖合適程度 31
表5：情色剪影圖片的裸露程度、親密程度與構圖合適程度 32
表6：中性灰階圖片的裸露程度、親密程度與構圖合適程度 32
表7：研究二案例範例 34
表8：目標人物有罪程度順序效果 38
表9：研究二加成效果 39

附錄目錄
附錄一：研究一職業評價問卷 53
附錄二：預試二問卷 59
附錄三：中文版對同性戀態度量表 62
附錄四：英文版對同性戀態度量表 64
附錄五：中文版平等信念量表 65
附錄六：英文版平等信念量表 66
附錄七：男同性戀情感錯誤歸因模式情緒刺激 67
附錄八：男同性戀情感錯誤歸因模式反應刺激 73
附錄九：研究二判決情境問卷 82		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 2569324 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098752003en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 嫌惡型歧視zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 男同性戀zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 情境規範zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 順序效果zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 情感錯誤歸因程序zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Aversive discriminationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) gay maleen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) context normen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) order effecten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Affect Misattribution Procedureen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) AMPen_US
dc.title (題名) 嫌惡型男同性戀歧視：情境規範與訊息順序的影響zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Aversive gay male discrimination: the impact of context norm and order effecten_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 吳翠松（2001）。報紙中的同志--十五年來同性戀議題報導的解析。收錄於何春蕤（主編），同志研究（頁89-116）。台北：巨流。
高松景、晏涵文、劉洁心（2004）。台北市中小學「兩性平等教育」評量之縱貫性研究。臺灣性學學刊，10，1-17。
陳雅伶（2007）。大學生性別角色刻板印象與對同性戀態度之相關研究。國立臺南大學諮商與輔導學系，碩士論文，未出版，台南市。
塗沅澂（2002）。個體對同性戀所持態度之外顯測量與內隱測量比較。輔仁大學心理學系，碩士論文，未出版，台北縣。
趙子揚（2006）。單純曝光效果：外顯與內隱測量。國立中正大學心理學系，碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。
顏甫珉（2007年10月13日）。OUT雜誌票選台北市對同志最友善。聯合報，A10版。
孫蒨如、陳婉榕（2012）。關係脈絡思考及個人脈絡思考對印象形成歷程的影響。本土心理學研究，37，1-56。
Aberson, C. L. (2003). Aversive bias toward gay men? Current Research in Social Psychology, 8, 266-274.
Aberson, C. L., Swan, D. J., & Emerson, E. P. (1999). Covert discrimination against gay men by U.S. college students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 323-334.
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Angermeyer, M.C., Matschinger, H. (2004).The Stereotype of Schizophrenia and Its Impact on Discrimination Against People With Schizophrenia: Results From a Representative Survey in Germany. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 1049-1061.
Ashmore, R. D., & Del Boca, F. K. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotyping. In Hamilton, D. L. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 1-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ben-Ari, A. (1995). The discovery that an offspring is gay: Parents’, gay men’s and lesbians’ perspectives. Journal of Homosexuality, 30, 89-112.
Berrill, K. T. (1990). Anti-gay violence and victimization in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 274-294.
Cuenot, R. G., & Fugita, S. S. (1982). Perceived homosexuality: Measuring heterosexual attitudinal and nonverbal reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 100-106.
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.
Fazio, R. H.(1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 75-109). New York: Academic Press.
Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013-1027.
Feagin, J. R., & Eckberg, D. L. (1980). Discrimination: Motivation, Action, Effects, and Context. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 1-20.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1977). The subtlety of White racism, arousal, and helping behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 691-707.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (Ed.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 61-89). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2005). Understanding and addressing contemporary racism: From aversive racism to the common ingroup identity model. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 615-639.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E. & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
Gurwitz, S. B., & Marcus, M. (1978). Effects of anticipated interaction, sex, and homosexual stereotypes on first impressions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8, 47-56.
Haddock, G, Zanna, M. P., & Esses, V. M. (1993). Assessing the structure of prejudicial attitudes: The case of attitudes toward homosexuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1105-1118.
Herek, G.M. (1988). Heterosexuals` attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. The Journal of Sex Research, 25, 451-477.
Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals` attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In Greene, B. & Herek, G. M. (Ed.) Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications.Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay issues, Vol. 1. (pp. 206-228) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Herek, G. M. (2000). Sexual prejudice and gender: do heterosexuals` attitudes toward lesbians and gay men differ? Journal of Social Issues, 56, 251–266.
Herek, G. M. (2004). Beyond “homophobia”: Thinking about sexual prejudice and stigma in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1, 6-24.
Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999). Sex differences in how heterosexuals think about lesbians and gay men: Evidence from survey context effects. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 348-360.
Hertrick, E. S., & Martin, A. D. (1987). Developmental issues and their resolution for gay and lesbian adolescents. Journal of Homosexuality, 14, 25-43.
Hodson, G., Hooper, H., Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2005). Aversive racism in Britain: the use of inadmissible evidence in legal decisions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 437-448.
Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: Ingroup preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 629-642.
Karlins, M., Coffman, T., & Walters, G. (1969). On the fading of social stereotypes: Studies in three generations of college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 1-16.
Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and american value conflict: correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55,893-905.
Katz, I., Wackenhut, J., & Hass, R. G. (1986). Racilal ambivalence, value duality, and behavior. In Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (Ed.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 35-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Kimmel, M. (1994). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity. In Brod, H.& Kaufman, M. (Eds.), Theorizing masculinities (pp. 119-141). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Kite, M. E., & Whitley, B. E. Jr. (1998). Do heterosexual women and men differ in their attitudes toward homosexuality? A conceptual and methodological analysis. In Herek, G. M. (Ed. ), Stigma and Sexual Orientation (pp. 39-61). London, ND: Sage Publication.
Krosnick, J.A. (1999). Survey research. Annual review of psychology, 50, 537-567.
McConahay, J. B. (1983). Modern racism and modern discrimination the effects of race, racial attitudes, and context on simulated hiring decisions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 551-558.
Meyer, I. H. (2007). Prejudice and Discrimination as Social Stressors. In Meyer, I. H., & Northridge, M. E. (Ed.), The Health of Sexual Minorities (pp. 242-267). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. New York, NY: Springer.
Morin, S. F., & Garfinkle, E. M. (1978). Male homophobia. Journal of Social Issues, 34, 29-47.
Morrison, M. A., & Morrison, T. G. (2002). Development and validation of a scale measuring modern prejudice toward gay men and lesbian women. Journal of Homosexuality, 43, 15-37.
Myrdal, G. (1944). An American dilemma. New York: Harper.
Payne, B. K., Cheng, C. M., Govorun, O. & Stewart, B. D., (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277-293.
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531-554.
Rokeach, M. & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989) Stability and change in American value priorities, 1968–1981. American Psychologist, 44, 775-784.
Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. London: Academic Press.
Schutz, H., & Six, B. (1996). How strong is the relationship between prejudice and discrimination? A meta-analytic answer. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 441-462.
Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (1992). Context effects in social and psychological research. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Shidlo, A. (1994). Internalized homophobia: Conceptual and empirical issues in measurement. In Greene, B, Herek, G. M. (Eds), Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 176-205). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Simon, A. (1998). The relation between stereotyoes of and attitudes toward lesbian and gays. In Herek, G. M. (Ed. ), Stigma and Sexual Orientation (pp. 62-81). London, ND: Sage Publication.
Son Hing, L. S., Chung-Yan, G. A., Grunfeld, R., Robichaud, L. K., & Zanna, M. P. (2005). Exploring the discrepancy between implicit and explicit prejudice. In Forgas, J. P., Williams, K. D., Laham, S. M. (Eds.), Social motivation: Conscious and unconscious processes (pp. 274-293). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Stangor, C., Sullivan, L. A., & Ford, T. E. (1991). Affective and Cognitive Determinants of Prejudice. Social Cognition, 9, 359-380.
Talley, A. E. & Bettencourt, B. A. (2008). Evaluations and aggression directed at a gay male target: the role of threat and antigay prejudice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 647–683.
Taylor, D. G., Sheatsley, P. B. & Greeley, A. M. (1978). Attitudes toward racial integration. Scientific American, 238, 42-49.
Tourangeau, R., & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 299-314.
United Nations. (2011, November). Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. Retrieved September 15, 2012, from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/19session/a.hrc.19.41_english.pdf.
Walls, N. E. (2008). Toward a multidimensional understanding of heterosexism: the changing nature of prejudice. Journal of Homosexuality, 55, 20-70.
Wilson, D. C. (2010). Perceptions about the amount of interracial prejudice depend on racial group membership and question order. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 344-356.
Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitude. Psychological Review, 107, 101-126.
Yen, CF , Pan, SM, Hou, SY, Liu, HC, Wu, SJ, Yang, WC, & Yang, HH. (2007). Attitudes toward gay men and lesbians and related factors among nurses in Southern Taiwan. Public Health, 121, 73-79.
Zanna, M. P. (1994). On the nature of prejudice. Canadian Psychology, 35, 11-23.		zh_TW