ATLS was good 20-product measure comprising a few balances, attitudes toward lesbians (ATL) and you can homosexual people (ATG)

This study falls under a wider little bit of browse for the classification affairs and you may related perceptions with the more public communities. Most of the people was basically looked at immediately after giving their consent written down. Respondents was hoping privacy to-do some papers-and-pencil surveys towards ATLG procedures personally. Volunteers obtained a lot more borrowing factors for their movement grade. The moral requirements of the Chilean Browse Fee (CONICYT) was basically accompanied.

Simultaneously, political thinking-categorization (inquiring on political choices coded with the around three groups: remaining, heart and you can correct) and you may sexual orientation were integrated

Participants replied demographic concerns to test ATLG legitimacy: intercourse, ages, socioeconomic standing (highest, center and low levels were used), and you may faith identification by way of worry about-revealing on cure for issue “Do you really believe on your own a spiritual people?” As well, a 4-product scale size into a beneficial six-point Likert scale regarding your strengths participants share with their spiritual facts within their everyday lifestyle was utilized.

It was developed in Northern America. ATLG is measured on a 6-point Likert scale. The instrument was translated and adapted (Cardenas Barrientos, 2008) (see the Appendix). The ATLG Spanish language version in this study had not been used with Chilean populations before. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.94 for ATLG; 0.88 for ATL; and 0.91 for ATG (The ATLG and the two subscales demonstrated good internal consistence for this sample. The correlation for the two subscales is high (r ₍₅₀₃₎ = 0.84; p < 0.001). ATLG overall mean was 3.52 (SD = 0.75).

Highest (alongside 6) score demonstrated deeper bias, and you can lowest score reported positive thinking to your homosexuals

Part of the goal would be to dictate the root ATLG foundation build. Very, about three foundation habits was indeed projected: a one-basis model (ATLG contains an individual homophobia cause of and therefore all points saturate); a-two-factor coordinated design (a couple dimensions constructed of the ATL and ATG subscales whose activities is to saturate regarding the associated factor try advised) an additional order model that have several correlated products (where ATG subscale facts perform saturate in two size – gay Beliefs and you can Characteristics – and people of your own ATL level do saturate about most other about three – lesbian Antique Thinking, and you will Societal Sanction and you will Personal Liberties). These types of four proportions was in fact extracted from analyses done in previous studies (Cardenas Barrientos, 2008).

In general, the latest match is ideal when model affairs try improved. Ergo, both-foundation second order design is among the most parsimonious for everybody indexes acquired. CFI (Relative Fix List) and you can NFI (Regular Match List) indexes reveal values over 0.9, them considered decent (Bentler Dudgeon, 1996). RFI (Relative Fix List) well worth approaches 0.nine, especially in the 5-factor model gratis adulti incontri eterosessuali. Simultaneously, RMSEA (Supply Mean square Mistake off Approximation) index is actually tall which have philosophy less than 0.08 (Browne Kudeck, 1993), thus verifying a knowledgeable match of your five-foundation design.

Table 3 also shows the factor saturations for each of the five sub-scales model items. All standardized saturations were significant (p < 0.001). All of the 20 items of the standardized solution loaded on the general grouping factor in the expected direction. The relation between the five latent factors is as follows (covariance): the dimension Social Rights has a high positive correlation with the factor Nature (r = 0.6); moderate positive with both Social Rights (r = 0.43) and Social Sanction (r = 0.038); and high positive with Traditional Values (r = 0.74). The dimension Nature is moderately and positively correlated with Social Rights (r = 0.32) and Social Sanction (r = 0.35), but highly and positively correlated with Traditional Values (r = 0.61). The relation of the dimension Social Rights with Social Sanction (r = 0.31) and Traditional Values (r = 0.37) is moderate high. Finally, the relation between Traditional Values and Social Sanction is moderate positive (r = 0.43).