Attitudes of Military Personnel Toward Homosexuals

Armando X. Estrada, MA

University of Texas, El Paso

David J. Weiss, PhD

California State University, Los Angeles

Armando X. Estrada, MA, is a doctoral candidate at the University of Texas, El Paso.

David J. Weiss, PhD, is Professor of Psychology at California State University, Los Angeles.

Please address correspondence concerning this article to Armando X. Estrada, Department of Psychology, University of Texas, El Paso, 500 W. University Dr., El Paso, TX 79968-0553. email: axestrad@utep.edu., or to David J. Weiss, Department of Psychology, California State University, Los Angeles, 5151 State University Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90032. email: dweiss@calstatela.edu.

This report is based on a thesis submitted by the first author and supervised by the second to the Department of Psychology, California State University, Los Angeles, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the M.A. degree. We wish to thank J. D. Tate and William Wasson for valuable contributions to the study, and Linda Garnets, Gregory Herek, Anne Peplau, and Walter Williams for critical reviews of an earlier version of the manuscript. Although we did receive cooperation from a military officer in gaining access to participants, this project has not been sponsored or sanctioned by any governmental authority.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess attitudes of enlisted military personnel with regard to homosexuality. Seventy-two male members of the Marine Corps Reserve responded to a questionnaire exploring attitudes toward lesbians and gay men and attitudes toward homosexuals in the military. Results showed that attitudes with respect to these topics were mildly unfavorable. In addition, several predictor variables employed in similar studies with civilians were examined. Correlational evidence showed that participants expressing more negative attitudes tended to have more conservative political ideology, reported more religious attendance, and were more likely to have had no contact with a gay or lesbian person than those expressing less negative attitudes. These findings suggest that the attitudes held by enlisted military personnel are similar to those of their civilian counterparts.

 

 Keywords: attitudes; homosexuality; military personnel

Attitudes of Military Personnel towards Homosexuals

Jim Jennings had served in the Navy for 14 years when a fellow sailor under investigation identified Jennings as homosexual in order to reduce impending sanctions. During his career, Jennings had been awarded the Meritorious Joint Service Achievement medal, three Good Conduct medals and had been named Sailor of the Quarter for his ship. He was court-martialed for homosexual conduct, but was acquitted of all charges. When he went to reenlist for six more years, which would take him to retirement, the legal officer at the Long Beach port threatened Jennings. "If you reenlist," the officer said, "sometime in the next six years, I will make sure you do not reach retirement--even if I have to take the knife and stick it in your back myself". The officer then gave Jennings 24 hours in which to "think it over". Jim Jennings did not reenlist and was discharged in 1990 (Author, 1996).

Known publicly as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the current military policy directs that applicants for service will no longer be asked to review their sexual orientation. However, applicants will be informed of the conduct which is proscribed for members of the Armed Forces, including homosexual conduct (Division of Public Affairs, HQMC, 1993).

This policy is consistent with the general negative perspective on homosexual activity which empirical research has found. For example, Pratte (1993) examined changes in attitudes toward homosexuality across two samples drawn in 1986 and 1991, from a student and a non-student population. She found men expressed significantly greater negative attitudes toward homosexuality than did women. Participants in the 1986 study expressed more anti-homosexual attitudes than did participants in 1991. Wells (1992) found that a fear of being labeled homosexual was a significant concern to both male and female university students. The General Social Survey (GSS, 1991), in which a probability sample of non-institutionalized adults (1941 men, 2163 women) aged 18 and older were asked if they believe homosexuality to be "always wrong, almost always wrong, sometimes wrong or not wrong", found that 75% of adults believe same-sex sexual relations are either "always wrong" or "almost always wrong". Sheehan, Ambrosio, McDevitt, and Lennon (1990) examined change in AIDS-related attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors among 733 university students (aged 17-55 yrs) between 1986 and 1988. They found that attitudes toward homosexuals became more negative over the period, with men reporting more negative attitudes toward homosexuals than women. D'Augelli and Rose (1990) explored the relationship between the amount of personal knowledge of gay men and lesbians and homophobia among college freshmen. They reported that 30% preferred a college environment with only heterosexuals. Half of the respondents considered gay men "disgusting" and believed "homosexual activity was wrong". Herek (1988) found a consistent tendency for heterosexual males to express more hostile attitudes than heterosexual females, across three studies conducted in six different universities. Spees (1987) reviewed research on attitudes and behaviors related to alcohol, contraception, abortion, homosexuality, and parental relations conducted between 1974 and 1985. He found that 60% of the students viewed homosexuality as an "illness". Young and Whertvine (1982) found that college freshman generally expressed negative attitudes toward homosexuals. Price (1982) found that males held more negative views on homosexuality than did females. Both males and females tended to agree with a statement that "homosexuality is unnatural''. There was slightly less agreement with the statement that "homosexuality is a sin" and "if homosexuality is allowed to increase it will destroy our society."

In sum, surveys of the both the general population and of university students reveal that attitudes toward homosexuals are negative. However, this research and other studies of these attitudes have been carried out exclusively with civilian populations. No research on the attitudes of military personnel toward homosexuals in general or toward their service in the military has been reported in the scientific literature1.

Several studies using undergraduates, whose age range is roughly comparable to that of the military sample studied here, provide bases for comparison with a military sample. In general, attitudes have been shown to be negative, with certain demographic variables having predictive value. Kurdek (1988) examined attitudes toward homosexuals among undergraduate college students whose ages ranged from 18 to 40, with an average age around 20. He found that younger subjects had more negative attitudes. Other research has shown that men have slightly more negative attitudes toward homosexuals than females (Kite & Whitley, 1996; Oliver & Hyde, 1995; Whitley & Kite, 1995). Kunkel and Temple (1992) found that men were more homophobic than women. In addition, Herek (1994) found heterosexuals to be more hostile toward homosexuals of their own sex. Seltzerís (1992) male respondents were more likely to hold antihomosexual attitudes than females. The impact of education has been consistent; the less education a person has, the more likely attitudes are to be negative (Beran, Claybaker, Dillon, & Thomas, 1992; Bowman, 1979; Glenn & Weaver, 1979; Irwin & Thompson, 1977; Nyberg & Alston, 1976; Price & Hsu, 1992)

Numerous studies report that religious affiliation is related to attitudes toward homosexuals. Herek and Glunt (1993) found that subjects with a religious fundamentalist orientation were significantly more likely to express more negative views than those without a fundamentalist orientation. Bierly (1985) found that subjects who identified themselves as Christian were more prejudiced toward homosexuals than Catholics or those with no religion. In addition, religiosity -- the degree of participation in one's religion -- is a strong predictor of attitudes toward homosexuals. Herek (1994) found that regardless of religious orientation, heterosexuals who reported being religious were more likely to express anti-gay attitudes than heterosexuals who reported being non-religious. Sneddon and Kremer (1992) found that attitudes toward homosexuality were particularly negative among regular churchgoers.

Contact with a gay person also appears to predict attitudes toward homosexuals. Herek and Capitanio (1996) found that heterosexuals who had experienced interpersonal contact with gay men or lesbians expressed significantly more favorable general attitudes toward gay people than heterosexuals without contact. Herek and Glunt (1993) found less negative attitudes for those who indicated that they had a friend, a relative, or an acquaintance who was homosexual. Ellis and Vasseur (1993) found that interpersonal contact or exposure to male homosexuals and lesbians influenced the interviewing strategy (e.g., information-seeking questions for a proposed interview) that subjects used. Lance (1987) found that a majority of students (82%) who interacted with gay persons expressed low-to-moderate discomfort with homosexuals, while 61% of students who did not interact with gay persons expressed a high degree of discomfort with homosexuals.

Conservative political ideology and self identification as Republican has been linked to negative attitudes toward homosexuals. For example, Herek and Glunt (1993) reported that political ideology was the only significant demographic variable when compared to other demographic variables in respondents who had expressed contact with a gay or lesbian person. Bierly (1985) finds subjects labeled Republican are more prejudiced toward homosexuals than Democrats or Independents.

To summarize, research on attitudes toward lesbian and gay men using samples from both the general population and university students has found that heterosexualsí attitudes with respect to homosexuals to be negative. Furthermore, negative attitudes can be predicted from various demographic variables including, age, sex, level of education, religious attendance, political ideology, political party affiliation, and contact with a lesbians or gay men. However, none of this research has been carried out with military samples. This is of particular interest given the on-going debate on the roles of homosexuals in the military, and is especially timely as military policy regarding homosexuals is being challenged in the courts (see Able v. Perry, 1995).

A military population may be of interest in its own right. Because it is a relatively closed society with more control over its members than the general populace, the military has been a social laboratory for integration of both racial minorities and women in the workplace (Bogart, 1969). In fact, the integration of racial minorities into military units occurred with relative ease considering the controversy surrounding the question of segregation in the armed forces (Nalty & MacGregor, 1981). Past experience suggests that the military may be capable of reducing prejudice in its ranks and implementing integration (Hope, 1979). As members of the armed forces are forced to work in proximity to those with whom they prefer to remain isolated, attitudes may shift and tolerance may grow (Amir, 1976).

The primary purpose of the present study is to examine the attitudes of military personnel toward homosexuals and toward homosexuals serving in the military. In addition, we wish to examine whether demographic predictors identified in previous research using civilians are also predictive of military personnel's attitudes toward homosexuals.

Methods

Participants

The participants in the study included 72 male members of the Marine Corps Reserve in active service. All of the participants were from the same unit and had undergone basic and advanced training in their military occupational skill. Their age range was from 19 to 46, with a mean of 23.4 years; the average length of service was 4.2 years. Seventy-eight percent of the sample reported being single, 14.1 % being married, and 7.8% living with a significant other. The majority (94.2%) reported having a high school diploma, 77.1% reported having some college education, 4.3% reported being a college graduate and one subject reported having an advanced degree. The self-reported ethnic composition of the sample was 45.7% Latino, 12.9% Asian, 4.3% African American, 32.9% White, and 4.3% other. All of them lived within a fifty mile radius of the military base, which was in Southern California. They commuted to and from the base.

Procedure

The experimenter (the first author) met with the unit commander to request permission to address potential participants. The experimenter then met with the 72 Marines comprising the unit, during a regularly scheduled workday, to recruit participants for the study. They were informed that while the commander had no objection to their participation, the study itself had no connection to the military. Responses were to be kept confidential; only the research team, which did not include any military personnel, would see the completed questionnaires. The general purpose of the study was explained and voluntary participation was solicited. No one declined to participate.

The 40-item questionnaire was administered to groups of 30 participants (the third group had 12 participants) in a classroom on the military base. After seating the participants at individual desks, the experimenter read aloud some brief instructions. It was reiterated that participation was voluntary, and withdrawal at any time was permitted with no consequences. The questionnaire took about twenty minutes to complete. When finished, the participants placed their individual questionnaires in a large box and returned to their seats until the group was done. All of them completed the survey. Once the group was finished, they were given the opportunity to ask questions and were thanked for their participation.

Measures

The first twenty items were taken from the Attitudes Toward Lesbian and Gay men Scale (ATLG) (Herek, 1994). The ATLG consists of two ten-item subscales, one for attitudes toward gay men and the other for attitudes toward lesbians. The 20 statements are presented to respondents in Likert format. Scoring is accomplished by reversing some items and summing scores across items for each subscale (Herek, 1994). The assumptions are made that all items are equally important, and that the response alternatives constitute an interval scale. With a four-point response scale, individual scores can range from 20 (extremely negative attitudes) to 80 (extremely positive attitudes). The scale has shown to be reliable with college (Alpha = .95) and adult non-student (Alpha = .87) samples.

The next twenty items measured were concerned specifically with military issues. The Attitudes Toward Homosexuals in the Military scale (ATHM), developed for this project2, contains 14 attitudinal statements about homosexuals entering and serving in the military (See Table 1). Some of the items on the ATHM scale are designed to directly assess the service member's attitudes toward homosexuals in the military, while others are designed to indirectly assess a related attitudinal concept. The 14 statements are presented to respondents in Likert format, with a scale ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (4). Again the assumptions of item equivalence and of an interval scale are made. Thus, scoring for individual subjects is accomplished by summing scores across the 14 items. Reverse scoring is used for some items as indicated on Table 1. With a four-point response scale, individual scores can range from a low of 14 (extremely negative attitudes) to a high of 56 (extremely positive attitudes). The measure had a reliability of Cronbach alpha = .87. The other six items were distractors exploring job satisfaction; responses to these items were not analyzed.

----------------------

Insert Table 1 here

----------------------

Results

Attitudes of the present sample toward lesbians and gay men in general and toward homosexuals in the military were found to be mildly negative. Their attitudes toward gay men were significantly more negative than their attitudes toward lesbians. In addition, the demographic variables that correlate with negative attitudes in civilian populations also correlate in the military sample, largely in the same way.

The summed scores on the Attitudes Toward Lesbian and Gay men (ATLG) scale ranged from 30 to 64, with a mean of 47.52 (S.D. = 10.53). Incorporating the adjustment for reverse scoring, a response of 1 represents strong agreement with statements reflecting anti-gay attitudes. With nominal neutrality at 50, the obtained mean indicates a slight negativity in attitudes toward lesbian and gay men. The distributions of scores for the individual ATLG items are presented in Table 2. Over half of the sample (63.9%) agreed or strongly agreed with a statement that, "I think male homosexuals are disgusting." Sixty-six percent of the sample agreed or strongly agreed with the following statement, "Male homosexuality is a perversion."

On the other hand, there were some items on which subjects expressed acceptance of lesbians and gay men. For example, 77.8% of the subjects disagreed or strongly disagreed with a statement that, "Lesbians just can't fit into society." In addition, 59% indicated that they disagreed or strongly disagreed that, "Male homosexuals should not be allowed to teach school."

To contrast attitudes toward lesbians with attitudes toward gay men, we followed Herekís (1994) procedure and combined the ten items of the Attitudes Toward Lesbian and Gay men (ATLG) scale related to each target group. A matched sample t-test on the composite scores was conducted. The results show that military personnelís attitudes toward gay men are more negative than their attitudes toward lesbians (t (69) = 9.45, p < .001).

-----------------------

Insert Table 2 here

-----------------------

The Attitudes Toward Homosexuals in the Military scale showed subjects' attitudes toward homosexuals in the military to be somewhat more negative than attitudes toward homosexuals in general. The summed scores for the ATHM ranged from 16 to 35 with a mean of 28.32 (S.D.= 7.91); nominal neutrality is 35. The distributions of scores for the individual ATHM items are presented in Table 1. For example, 71.9% of the sample disagreed or strongly disagreed with the following statement, "I feel that the ban on homosexuals in armed forces should be lifted." Over half of the sample (77.5%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that, "I feel that Gays/Lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces." Sixty-three percent of the sample disagreed or strongly disagreed with the following statement: "Lesbians/gay men should be allowed to enter and remain in the military."

However, attitudes were not uniformly hostile to gays in the military. Only a slight majority (52%) of the sample disagreed or strongly disagreed with a statement that, "In the event of a draft, gay men should be drafted the same as straight men." Consistent with the "Donít ask, donít tell" policy, 69.2% agreed or strongly agreed with a statement that, "It is all right for gays and lesbians to be in the military as long as I don't know who they are."

The Pearson correlation coefficients between ATLG scores and the demographic variables of interest are presented in Table 3. Three predictors yielded relationships significant at the .05 level; these were conservative political ideology, religious attendance, and contact with a gay or lesbian person. The other predictors did not reach significance.

----------------------

Insert Table 3 here

-----------------------

ATLG scores and ATHM scores were found to be strongly associated. The correlation between ATLG and ATHM scores was high (r = 0.7019; p <.001). Lower scores on the ATLG (more negative attitudes) were predictive of lower scores on the ATHM (also more negative attitudes). However, none of the predictor variables reached significance for the ATHM scale.

Discussion

Previous research has revealed that attitudes toward homosexuals are negative and that they correlate highly with various demographic factors (Beran et al., 1992; Bowman, 1979; Glenn & Weaver, 1979; GSS, 1991; Herek, 1994; Herek & Glunt, 1993; Irwin & Thompson, 1977; Marsiglio, 1993; Nyberg & Alston, 1976). However, research examining attitudes toward homosexuals among military personnel has been lacking (Herek, 1993). The purpose of the present study was to assess military personnelís attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. In addition, the study also tried to understand the role that various demographic variables play in predicting attitudes toward homosexuals in military personnel.

The evidence indicates that military personnelís attitudes toward lesbians and gay men are mildly negative. Their attitudes toward gays in the military are somewhat more negative. This result appears to differ from the greater tolerance concerning civil liberties issues reported in surveys of civilians (see Herek (1991) for a review). We speculate that a key concern is shared residence, possibly for extended time periods. The military requires their personnel to leave their homes for extended periods of time for both training and deployment, and considers the boundaries of their jobs to be 24 hours a day/7 days a week. As such, civil liberties involving the rights of homosexuals in the workplace are different for military personnel than for civilians. The results also suggest that there may be support for the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. A majority (69.2%) expressed agreement that "It is all right for gays and lesbians to be in the military as long as I don't know who they are."

A comparison of military personnelís attitudes toward gay men and their attitudes toward lesbians reveals that attitudes toward gay men are more negative. This finding is consistent with those reported in studies of civilians. Herek (1988, 1994) has found that males express more hostile attitudes toward gay men than toward lesbians.

The results of the analyses of demographic variables are similar to those reported in previous studies (Beran et al., 1992; Green, Dixon, & Gold-Neil, 1993; Herek, 1994; Herek & Glunt, 1993; Kurdek, 1988; Marsiglio, 1993). Although the relatively small sample did not generate sufficient power to substantiate most of the predictors we examined, the present results did show that, as with civilian populations, negative attitudes are to some extent predictable from political ideology, religious attendance, and contact with gay persons. These results support the assumption that current findings on attitudes toward homosexuals are generalizable to military populations. Thus, attitudes among military personnel toward lesbians and gay men reflect the attitudes of the larger society.

Two of the items on the ATHM scale are somewhat ambiguous in that they contain two statements. These items were included because they capture policy issues, but they may have been problematic. We think disagreement with "It is all right for gays and lesbians to be in the military as long as I donít know who they are" means homosexuals should not serve. However, it is possible that an expressed disagreement might instead reflect a desire to see openly declared homosexuals in the military. As a majority of the respondents in fact agreed with this well-publicized item, perhaps the respondents shared our perspective on its meaning. Similarly, we think disagreement with "Allowing openly lesbian or gay men in the military would cause problems, but we could manage" means the respondent sees the difficulties as major, but one who foresees no problems would also disagree with the item. While separating the statements might have left us better placed, the overwhelming agreement concerning discomfort with shared housing suggests that the expressed disagreement with the item is consistent with our interpretation.

The generality of the study is limited by the particulars of the sample we were able to obtain. The ethnic make up of the present sample reflects that of Southern California, in that there is a high proportion of Latinos. Our respondents were enlisted male Reservists who had previously been full-time Marines. Marines were the participants because the first authorís experience as a Marine generated the personal connections that provided access to the sample.

It would be desirable to replicate the present study with both reserve and active duty Marines. Given that active duty Marines (e.g., full-time) live together, train, and deploy for longer periods of time than reservists, it is reasonable to expect that their attitudes may differ. It may be that active duty personnel may express similar attitudes or more negative attitudes given that they work in an environment that is perceived as being extremely hostile to gay men and lesbians. On the other hand, given that there are more opportunities for contact experiences to occur, active duty personnel may express positive attitudes as a result of positive contact experiences with other gay and lesbian military personnel. This notion is supported by studies showing that civilians who have had contact with gay men or lesbians express more positive attitudes than those without such experiences (Ellis & Vasseur, 1993; Herek & Capitanio, 1996; Herek & Glunt, 1993).

Also, it would be valuable to survey officers and females as well. Would the attitudes of military officers, who on average have at least a four year college education, be more similar to those of other educated civilians? Research with military officers is of critical importance since they are largely responsible for recommending changes and enforcing military policies in the services. Would military womenís attitudes toward lesbian and gay men differ from that of their male counterparts? Would their attitudes be more consistent with the generally more positive attitudes of civilian women?

In addition, it would be valuable to study other service branches as well. Given that each branch of the U.S. military has their own mission, it is reasonable to expect that there may be differences in their attitudes as well. For example, the Army, Navy, and Air Force have more technical occupations than the Marine Corps. Accordingly, the diversity in military occupational skills (MOSs) may be a relevant factor when examining the attitudes of individuals within and across the different branches. Specifically, it may be that individuals in combat MOSs (e.g., infantry, artillery) may have more negative attitudes than those in combat support jobs (e.g., supply, transportation). These differences could characterize the differences between the branches of the military as well as the differences within each branch.

Clearly, more research is needed to examine these and other questions raised by the present findings. Our experience has been that it is not trivial for civilian researchers to gain access to military samples. This is complicated by the reluctance of military officials to allow research to be conducted on this issue. Difficulties may be expected to be heightened when dealing with sensitive topics.

NOTES

1. We are aware of two Department of Defense sponsored studies using convenience samples (selected by the military) that found enlisted personnel to hold strongly negative views toward allowing homosexuals in the military (Moskos & Miller, 1992; RAND, 1993).

2. A detailed report on the development of the ATHM scale is available from the first author upon request.

References

Able v. Perry, NO. 94 CV 0974 (E. D. N. Y. 1995)

Amir, Y. (1976). The role of intergroup contact in change in prejudice and ethnic relations. In P.A. Katz (Ed.), Toward the elimination of racism (pp. 245-308). New York: Pergamon.

Author. (1996). Turning bad into good. Frontiers, 14, 48.

Beran, N. J., Claybaker, C., Dillon, C., & Haverkamp, R. J. (1992). Attitudes toward minorities: A comparison of homosexuals and the general population. Journal of Homosexuality, 23, 65-83.

Bierly, M. M. (1985). Prejudice toward contemporary outgroups as a generalized attitude. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 189-199.

Bogart, L. (1969). Social research and the integration of the U.S. army. Chicago: Markham.

Bowman, R. (1979). Public attitudes toward homosexuality in New Zealand. International Review of Modern Sociology, 9, 229-238.

D'Augelli, A. R., & Rose, M. L. (1990). Homophobia in a university community: Attitudes and experiences of heterosexual freshmen. Journal of College Student Development, 31, 484-491.

Division of Public Affairs, HQMC. (1993). President announces new policy on gays. Marines, 22, 3.

Ellis, A. L., & Vasseur, R. B. (1993). Prior interpersonal contact with and attitudes towards gays and lesbians in an interviewing context. Journal of Homosexuality, 25, 31-45.

General Social Survey. (1991). National Opinion Research Center. University of Chicago.

Glenn, N., & Weaver, C. N. (1979). Attitudes towards premarital, extramarital, and homosexual relations in the U.S. in the 1970's. Journal of Sex Research, 15, 108-118.

Green, S., Dixon, P., & Gold-Neil, V. ( 1993). The effects of a gay/lesbian panel discussion on college student attitudes toward gay men, lesbians and persons with AIDS. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 19, 47-63.

Herek, G. M. (1988). Heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. Journal of Sex Research, 25, 451-477.

Herek, G.M. (1991). Stigma, prejudice and violence against lesbians and gay men. In J. C. Gonsoriek & J. D. Weinrich (Eds.), Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy (pp. 60-80). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Herek, G. M. (1993). Sexual orientation and military service: A social science perspective. American Psychologist, 48, 538-549.

Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals' attitudes towards lesbian and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In B. Green & G. M. Herek (Eds.), Contemporary Perspectives on Lesbian and Gay Issues in Psychology (pp. 206-228). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1996). Some of my best friends: Intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexualsí attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 412-424.

Herek, G., & Glunt, E. K. (1993). Interpersonal contact and heterosexuals' attitudes toward gay men: Results from a national survey. The Journal of Sex Research, 30, 239-244.

Hope, R. O. (1979). Racial strife in the U.S. military: Toward the elimination of discrimination. New York: Praeger.

Irwin, P., & Thompson, N. L. (1977). Acceptance of the rights of homosexuals: A social profile. Journal of Homosexuality, 3, 107-121.

Kite, M. E., & Whitley, B. E. (1996). Sex differences in attitudes toward homosexual persons, behaviors, and civil rights: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 336-353.

Kunkel, L. E., & Temple, L. L. (1992). Attitudes towards AIDS and homosexuals: Gender, marital status, and religion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1030-1040.

Kurdek, L. (1988). Correlates of negative attitudes towards homosexuals in heterosexual college students. Sex Roles, 18, 727-738.

Lance, L. M. (1987). The effects of interaction with gay persons on attitudes toward homosexuality. Human Relations, 40, 329-336.

Marsiglio, W. (1993). Attitudes toward homosexual activity and gays as friends: A national survey of heterosexual 15-to-19 year-old males. The Journal of Sex Research, 30, 12-17.

Moskos, C., & Miller, L. (1993). 1992 sociological survey of the Army. In RAND, Sexual Orientation and U. S. military personnel policy options and assessments (pp. 457-462). Santa Monica, CA: National Defense Research Institute.

Nalty, B. C., & MacGregor, M. J. (1981). Blacks in the military: Essential documents. Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources Inc.

Nyberg, K. L., & Alston, J. P. (1976). Analysis of public attitudes toward homosexual behavior. Journal of Homosexuality, 2, 99-107.

Oliver, M. E., & Hyde, J, S. (1995). Gender differences in attitudes toward homosexuality: A reply to Whitley and Kite. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 155-158.

Pratte, T. (1993). A comparative study of attitudes toward homosexuality: 1986 and 1991. Journal of Homosexuality, 26, 77-83.

Price, J. H. (1982). High school students' attitudes toward homosexuality. Journal of School Health, 52, 469-474.

Price, V., & Hsu, M. (1992). Public opinions about aids policies: The role of misinformation and attitudes towards homosexuals. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 29-52.

RAND. (1993). Sexual orientation and U. S. military personnel policy options and assessments. Santa Monica, CA: National Defense Research Institute.

Seltzer, R. (1992). The social location of those holding antihomosexual attitudes. Sex Roles, 26, 391-398.

Sheehan, E. P., Ambrosio, A. L., McDevitt, T. M., & Lennon, R. (1990). An examination of change in reports of AIDS-related knowledge and attitudes in 1986 and 1988. Psychological Reports, 67, 723-729.

Sneddon, I., & Kremer, J. (1992). Sexual behavior and attitudes of university students in Northern Ireland. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 21, 295-312.

Spees, E. R. (1987). College students' sexual attitudes and behaviors, 1974-1985: A review of the literature. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 135-140.

Wells, J. W. (1992). Heterosexual university students' perceptions of homosexual behavior. Annals of Sex Research, 5, 171-179

Whitley, B. E., & Kite, M. E. (1995). Sex differences in attitudes toward homosexuality: A comment on Oliver and Hyde (1993). Psychological Bulletin, 117, 146-154.

Young, M., & Whertvine, J. (1982). Attitudes of heterosexual students toward homosexual behavior. Psychological Reports, 51, 673-674.

Table 1

Military Personnelís' Attitudes Toward Homosexuals in the Military

Scale Item

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Item Mean

I feel that the ban on homosexuals in the armed forces should be lifted.*

7.0%

21.1%

29.61%

42.3%

1.930

Allowing openly gay and lesbian people in the armed forces would be very disruptive.

55.6%

29.2%

11.1%

4.2%

1.639

Gay men would not be reliable in a combat situation.

21.1%

19.7%

49.3%

9.9%

2.479

I would feel uncomfortable if there were a homosexual member in my unit.

42.3%

31%

23.9%

2.8%

1.873

If the ban was lifted homosexuals would be subject to physical violence.

41.7%

47.2%

6.9%

4.2%

1.736

Openly gay or lesbian service members would try and seduce straight service members.

16.7%

38.9%

37.5%

6.9%

2.347

I would feel uncomfortable having to share my room with a homosexual service member.

54.2%

36.1%

9.7%

0.0%

1.556

Gay males make me more uncomfortable than lesbians.

48.6%

37.5%

8.3%

5.6%

1.708

I feel that Gay/Lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces.*

2.8%

19.7%

35.2%

42.3%

1.831

In the event of a draft, gay men should be drafted the same as straight men.*

19.4%

27.8%

26.4%

26.4%

2.403

Allowing openly lesbian or gay men in the military would cause some problems but we could manage.*

12.9%

30.0%

32.9%

24.3%

2.314

Lesbian/gay men should be allowed to enter and remain in the military.*

8.3%

27.8%

30.6%

33.3%

2.111

It is alright for gays and lesbians to be in the military as long as I donít know who they are.*

15.5%

43.7%

19.7%

21.1%

2.535

Allowing gay and lesbians in the military will increase soldiersí acceptance of gays and lesbians.*

8.5%

22.5%

32.4%

36.6%

2.028

*Reverse-scored. Item means have been reversed.

Table 2

Military Personnelís' Attitudes Toward Lesbian and Gay Men

Scale Item

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Item Mean

Lesbians just canít fit into our society.

6.9%

15.3%

61.1%

16.7%

2.875

A womanís homosexuality should not be a cause for job discrimination in any situation.*

34.7%

34.7%

25.0*

5.6%

2.986

Female homosexuality is detrimental to society because it breaks down the natural divisions between the sexes.

14.1%

32.4%

50.7%

2.8%

2.423

State laws regulating private, consenting lesbian behavior should be loosened.*

10.0%

41.1%

31.4%

17.1%

2.443

Female homosexuality is a sin.

22.2%

27.8%

43.1%

6.9%

2.347

The growing number of lesbians indicates a decline in American morals.

21.1%

32.4%

38.0%

8.5%

2.338

Female homosexuality in itself is no problem but what society makes of it can be a problem.*

15.7%

54.3%

22.9%

7.1%

2.786

Female homosexuality is a threat to many of our basic social institutions.

11.1%

33.3%

37.5%

18.1%

2.625

Female homosexuality is an inferior form of sexuality.

8.5%

39.4%

35.2%

16.9%

2.606

Lesbians are sick.

12.5%

27.8%

43.1%

16.7%

2.639

Male homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt children the same as heterosexual couples.*

5.6%

25.0%

18.1%

51.4%

1.847

I think male homosexuals are disgusting.

41.7%

22.2%

29.2%

6.9%

2.014

Male homosexuals should not be allowed to teach school.

20.8%

19.4%

44.4%

15.3%

2.542

Male homosexuality is a perversion.

32.4%

33.8%

31%

2.8%

2.042

Just as in other species, male homosexuality is a natural expression of sexuality in human men.

4.2%

30.6%

33.3%

31.9%

2.931

If a man has homosexual feelings, he should do everything he can to overcome them.

23.6%

33.3%

38.9%

4.2%

2.236

I would not be too upset if I learned that my son was a homosexual.*

5.6%

5.6%

38.9%

50.0%

1.667

Homosexual behavior between two men is just plain wrong.

33.8%

35.2%

23.9%

7.0%

2.042

The idea of male homosexual marriages seems ridiculous to me.

48.6%

29.2%

19.4%

2.8%

1.764

Male homosexuality is merely a different kind of lifestyle that should not be condemned.*

26.4%

19.4%

41.7%

12.5%

2.597

*Reverse-scored. Item means have been reversed.

Table 3

Pearson Correlations of ATLG and ATHM Scores with Predictor Variables

Variables

ATLG

ATHM

Age

-0.1810

-0.0948

Education

0.0779

-0.0611

Grade/Rank

-0.0248

0.0741

Months in the Military

-0.1733

-0.0808

Political Ideology

-0.3916*

0.1966

Religious Attendance

-0.3013*

0.0934

Contact

0.2785*

-0.1338

*p< .05, 68 df