Limits...
On Feeling Torn About One's Sexuality: The Effects of Explicit-Implicit Sexual Orientation Ambivalence.

Windsor-Shellard B, Haddock G - Pers Soc Psychol Bull (2014)

Bottom Line: The results revealed that participants with greater SO ambivalence took longer responding to explicit questions about their sexual preferences, an effect moderated by the direction of ambivalence.Study 2 replicated this effect using a different paradigm.Among straight participants, the response time results replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Cardiff University, UK.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Study 2: The impact of the amount (separate lines) and direction (x axis) of SO ambivalence on elaboration after reading highly relevant information.Note. SO = sexual orientation.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2 - License 3
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4230544&req=5

fig3-0146167214539018: Study 2: The impact of the amount (separate lines) and direction (x axis) of SO ambivalence on elaboration after reading highly relevant information.Note. SO = sexual orientation.

Mentions: However, this effect was qualified by a significant three-way interaction, β = −.29, t(107) = −1.98, p = .05, such that the interaction between the amount and the direction of SO ambivalence was moderated by information relevancy. Among participants who read highly relevant information, there was a significant difference in elaboration as a function of the amount and direction of SO ambivalence, β = −.60, t(53) = −3.25, p = .002 (see Figure 3). As with the response latency outcome, this interaction revealed two key findings. First, among individuals who reported being less straight than in the explicit measure of SO than that stipulated by the implicit measure, those with high SO ambivalence elaborated more compared with those with low SO ambivalence β = .84, t(53) = 3.67, p = .001. Second, for those who reported being more straight on the explicit measure of SO than that stipulated by the implicit measure, there was no difference in elaboration as a function of the amount of SO ambivalence, β = −.23, t < 1. This pattern parallels the response time findings and offers convergent evidence that deliberation about sexuality differs as a function of the amount and direction of SO ambivalence.


On Feeling Torn About One's Sexuality: The Effects of Explicit-Implicit Sexual Orientation Ambivalence.

Windsor-Shellard B, Haddock G - Pers Soc Psychol Bull (2014)

Study 2: The impact of the amount (separate lines) and direction (x axis) of SO ambivalence on elaboration after reading highly relevant information.Note. SO = sexual orientation.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2 - License 3
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4230544&req=5

fig3-0146167214539018: Study 2: The impact of the amount (separate lines) and direction (x axis) of SO ambivalence on elaboration after reading highly relevant information.Note. SO = sexual orientation.
Mentions: However, this effect was qualified by a significant three-way interaction, β = −.29, t(107) = −1.98, p = .05, such that the interaction between the amount and the direction of SO ambivalence was moderated by information relevancy. Among participants who read highly relevant information, there was a significant difference in elaboration as a function of the amount and direction of SO ambivalence, β = −.60, t(53) = −3.25, p = .002 (see Figure 3). As with the response latency outcome, this interaction revealed two key findings. First, among individuals who reported being less straight than in the explicit measure of SO than that stipulated by the implicit measure, those with high SO ambivalence elaborated more compared with those with low SO ambivalence β = .84, t(53) = 3.67, p = .001. Second, for those who reported being more straight on the explicit measure of SO than that stipulated by the implicit measure, there was no difference in elaboration as a function of the amount of SO ambivalence, β = −.23, t < 1. This pattern parallels the response time findings and offers convergent evidence that deliberation about sexuality differs as a function of the amount and direction of SO ambivalence.

Bottom Line: The results revealed that participants with greater SO ambivalence took longer responding to explicit questions about their sexual preferences, an effect moderated by the direction of ambivalence.Study 2 replicated this effect using a different paradigm.Among straight participants, the response time results replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Cardiff University, UK.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus