As well, even if sex differences were requested, i discover no differences between males and females

Even though our analyses look for a great fit to the study, i examined if or not other design you are going to fit the information exactly as well or most useful (MacCallum, Wegener, Uchino, & Fabrigar, 1993). Figure 2 gifts so it inversed causation solution model below.

An option exploratory structural model: What if intimate bias predicts telecommunications and confident feel having homosexuals, perceived resemblance which have peers’ perceptions to the homosexuality, and religiosity. All the strong traces depict mathematically extreme pathways on .05 peak. Magnitudes out-of organization try served with the standard problems into the parentheses; X 2 (61, N = 360) = . Normed (NFI), non-normed (NNFI), and you can comparative (CFI) goodness-of-fit try .91, .91, .93, respectively; RMSEA try .09.

Theoretically, it is simply given that possible that individuals that have better bad perceptions to the homosexuality manage eliminate getting gay males and you can lesbians, score the connections due to the fact bad, seeing their friends since having other attitudes on the gay people, otherwise see support about their viewpoints in their religiosity

The new alternative model got a great fit, [? 2 (61, N = 360) = , p 2 =11%); confident skills which have homosexual people and you can lesbians (?=-.fifty, se = .06, p dos =25%); seen fellow similarities in their attitudes on the homosexuals (?=-.19, se = .08, p dos =4%); and you will, religiosity (?=.48, se = .04, p dos =23%). High correlations was indeed found on the disruptions from detected similarities that have peers’ attitudes toward homosexuals as well as their earlier in the day interactions with homosexual guys and lesbians (r=.18, se = .06, p 2 =.11); 25% off participants’ positive event which have homosexual individuals (Roentgen 2 =.25); 4% out-of fellow parallels having homosexual everyone (R 2 =.04); and you can 23% away from religiosity (Roentgen 2 =.23).

When you are these answers are notable, i compared hence model suitable the knowledge finest utilising the Model AIC and you will Model CAIC coefficients having non-nested model reviews and every models’ fit indices. The original model had a much better match (Model AIC=; Design CAIC=-; NFI = .92; NNFI = .92; CFI = .94; RMSEA = .08) versus alternative model (Model AIC = & CAIC=-; NFI = .91; NNFI = .91; CFI = .93; RMSEA = .09). The difference into the match along the one or two designs ways our very own completely new model’s theoretical rationale fits the info most readily useful (Byrne, 1994).

Dialogue

I set-up a structural design to test if interactions and you can self-confident experience having homosexuals, imagined parallels with peers’ thinking with the homosexuality, and you can religiosity had been predictive out of sexual bias among a society off Puerto Rican young people. Our conclusions suggest all of the latent details, with the exception of peers’ attitudes with the homosexuality, predicted participants’ intimate prejudice to the homosexual everyone. If you’re previous scientists have found sexual bias is generally higher for men than people (Kite, 1992; Herek, 2000b), we were not able to imitate these types of abilities.

Just how many homosexual people recognized of the users faster their said intimate bias to your homosexual group. So it looking for shows that Puerto Rican youth’s sexual prejudice are determined by the deficiency of connection with gays and you will lesbians. New stigmatization away from gay men and women regarding the Puerto Rican people may restriction some students’ exposure to homosexual men and you may lesbians. Within this society, bringing inside-classification panels with gay men and you may lesbians, such as, will get support students’ relationships that have gay boys and you can lesbians. Almost every other researchers have found these types of class factors fall off certain heterosexual’s negative appraisals towards the homosexual males and lesbians (Sakalli & Ugurlu, 2001).

Our results along with advise that participants’ positive knowledge which have homosexual boys and you may lesbians use an influence within sexual prejudice towards gay some one. Participants’ recollection out of self-confident feel which have homosexual guys and you can lesbians are highly predictive of their intimate bias. Also, the clear presence of a confident relationship ranging from participants’ interactions that have homosexuals as well as their remember of confident event with this specific category means an iterative processes by which Puerto Rican young adults you certainly will boost or decrease its intention to activate with gay group during the later on moments. This type of findings suggest that Puerto Rican more youthful adults’ appraisals of its experience of gay men and women are particularly important when you look at the build and you may utilization of items to lessen intimate prejudice. Points and configurations creating an environment where greeting and you will open talk was stabilized may facilitate confident interchanges. Search about what constitutes self-confident experiences anywhere between Puerto Rican heterosexual and gay people becomes necessary.