Assessing the Effects of a Real-Life Contact Intervention on Prejudice Toward LGBT People

Florien M Cramwinckel,Daan T Scheepers,Tom F Wilderjans,Robert-Jan B De Rooij

doi:10.1007/s10508-021-02046-0

Florien M Cramwinckel, Daan T Scheepers + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02046-0

Copy DOI

Abstract

Prejudice against sexual and gender minorities (e.g., LGBT people) is quite prevalent and is harmful. We examined an existing—and often-used—contact intervention in pre-existing groups in an educational setting and assessed its effectiveness in reducing different forms of LGBT negativity. We focused particularly on modern LGBT negativity: a relatively subtle form of prejudice, involving ambivalence, denial, and/or the belief that there is too much attention for LGBT prejudice. We used a mixed design in which condition (experimental vs. control group) was the between-participants factor, which was randomized at the group level, and time (pretest vs. posttest vs. follow-up) was the within-participants factor (N = 117). Interventions were video recorded and the behavior of LGBT educators and participants was coded. Participants responded positively to the intervention, especially to the LGBT educator’s “coming-out story.” Exploratory analysis of the video data indicated that the perceived effectiveness of the intervention was higher in groups where participants were more engaged, although caution is necessary in interpreting this finding. The most important measure indicated that modern LGBT negativity decreased in the intervention groups directly after the intervention, but returned to baseline levels one week later. However, in the control condition, modern LGBT negativity had increased over time. Taken together, this suggests that an actual reduction in modern LGBT negativity was short-lived (i.e., the intervention effect disappeared within 7 days).

Highlights

Prejudice and violence against sexual and gender minorities occurs quite often, even in relatively tolerant countries as the Netherlands (Buijs et al, 2011; Cramwinckel et al, 2018; Kuyper, 2015)
Of the 117 participants, 10 participants completed part of this research but their data were excluded from the analyses for one or more of the following reasons: (1) because they did not take part in the contact intervention while they were allocated to the experimental condition orbecause they took part in the contact intervention while they were allocated to the control condition, (2) they did not completethe posttest and follow-up measures, and/or (3) they did not provide
Modern LGBT negativity is measured on 100-point scale; other constructs are measured on 7-point scales

Summary

Introduction

Prejudice and violence against sexual and gender minorities (e.g., people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender [LGBT]) occurs quite often, even in relatively tolerant countries as the Netherlands (Buijs et al, 2011; Cramwinckel et al, 2018; Kuyper, 2015). There are several programs in place to target sexual orientation and gender identity prejudice (see, e.g., Bartos et al, 2014; Cramwinckel et al, 2018). Existing interventions are often not scientifically based, thereby lacking a clear theoretical background, a theory of change, and rigorous empirical testing. As a consequence, it remains largely an open question how effective such interventions . An example item was “I’m always willing to admit it when I make a mistake.” Analyses Plan

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion