東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back to Search results for [ null ]

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Sexual minority stigma and system ju...

Blenner, Jordan A.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Sexual minority stigma and system justification theory: How changing the status quo impacts marriage and housing equality.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Sexual minority stigma and system justification theory: How changing the status quo impacts marriage and housing equality./
Author:	Blenner, Jordan A.
Description:	296 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-04(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International77-04B(E).
Subject:	Social psychology. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3738479
ISBN:	9781339288925

Sexual minority stigma and system justification theory: How changing the status quo impacts marriage and housing equality.
Blenner, Jordan A.

Sexual minority stigma and system justification theory: How changing the status quo impacts marriage and housing equality. - 296 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-04(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Nebraska - Lincoln, 2015.

Sexual minorities (i.e. lesbians and gay men) experience systemic discrimination throughout the United States. Prior to the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), in many states, same-sex couples could not marry and sexual minorities were not protected from sexual orientation housing discrimination (Human Rights Campaign, 2015). The current, two-experiment study applied Jost and Banaji's (1994) System Justification Theory to marriage and housing discrimination. When sexual minorities question dissimilar treatment, thereby threatening the status quo, members of the heterosexual majority rationalize sexual minority discrimination to maintain their dominant status (Alexander, 2001; Brescoll, Uhlmann, & Newman, 2013; Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning, 2006; Jackson v. Abercrombie, 2012; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004; Rahman, 2004; Sevcik v. Sandoval, 2012). After sexual minority groups gained equality victories (i.e. Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, 2003; Romer v. Evans, 1996), heterosexual majority group members passed anti-marriage equality laws and did not pass sexual orientation discrimination protection (Alexander, 2001; Bishop v. Smith, tenth circuit, 2014; Geiger v. Kitzhaber, 2014; Goldberg-Hiller & Milner, 2003; Henry & Reyna, 2007; Kitchen v. Herbert, district court, 2013; Wardle, 2005). Justifications for rights deprivation include stereotypes specific to the legal question (e.g., "special rights" discourse) as well as basic sexual stigma (Bruning, 2006; Herek & Garnets, 2007; Herek, 2004; Jackson, 2012; Rahman, 2004; Sevcik, 2012). However, once a new status quo becomes likely, both majority and minority group members support the new status quo (Eidelman, Crandall, & Pattershall, 2009; Kay, Jimenez, & Jost, 2002).

ISBN: 9781339288925Subjects--Topical Terms:

520219
Social psychology.

Sexual minority stigma and system justification theory: How changing the status quo impacts marriage and housing equality.
LDR:03521nmm a2200301 4500 001 2075665
005 20161024135727.5
008 170521s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781339288925
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3738479
035 $a AAI3738479
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Blenner, Jordan A. $3 3191066
245 1 0 $a Sexual minority stigma and system justification theory: How changing the status quo impacts marriage and housing equality.
300 $a 296 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-04(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: Richard L. Wiener.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Nebraska - Lincoln, 2015.
520 $a Sexual minorities (i.e. lesbians and gay men) experience systemic discrimination throughout the United States. Prior to the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), in many states, same-sex couples could not marry and sexual minorities were not protected from sexual orientation housing discrimination (Human Rights Campaign, 2015). The current, two-experiment study applied Jost and Banaji's (1994) System Justification Theory to marriage and housing discrimination. When sexual minorities question dissimilar treatment, thereby threatening the status quo, members of the heterosexual majority rationalize sexual minority discrimination to maintain their dominant status (Alexander, 2001; Brescoll, Uhlmann, & Newman, 2013; Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning, 2006; Jackson v. Abercrombie, 2012; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004; Rahman, 2004; Sevcik v. Sandoval, 2012). After sexual minority groups gained equality victories (i.e. Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, 2003; Romer v. Evans, 1996), heterosexual majority group members passed anti-marriage equality laws and did not pass sexual orientation discrimination protection (Alexander, 2001; Bishop v. Smith, tenth circuit, 2014; Geiger v. Kitzhaber, 2014; Goldberg-Hiller & Milner, 2003; Henry & Reyna, 2007; Kitchen v. Herbert, district court, 2013; Wardle, 2005). Justifications for rights deprivation include stereotypes specific to the legal question (e.g., "special rights" discourse) as well as basic sexual stigma (Bruning, 2006; Herek & Garnets, 2007; Herek, 2004; Jackson, 2012; Rahman, 2004; Sevcik, 2012). However, once a new status quo becomes likely, both majority and minority group members support the new status quo (Eidelman, Crandall, & Pattershall, 2009; Kay, Jimenez, & Jost, 2002).
520 $a The present research examined whether threats and new status quo likelihood impact heterosexual individuals' sexual orientation equality ballot decisions. The experiments manipulated current status quo by affirming or threatening it and status quo likelihood by telling participants that experts believed nationwide equality was 10% (or 30% or 60% or 90%) likely to occur by 2016. Experimental findings provide mixed support for system justification theory as an explanation for sexual stigma and discrimination in that individual differences variables determined participants' equality ballot decisions. However, threat and uncertainty disrupted this effect. Thus, the current research informs future system justification research within the sexual minority context.
590 $a School code: 0138.
650 4 $a Social psychology. $3 520219
650 4 $a LGBTQ studies. $3 2122706
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
690 $a 0451
690 $a 0492
690 $a 0398
710 2 $a The University of Nebraska - Lincoln. $b Psychology. $3 1020482
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 77-04B(E).
790 $a 0138
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3738479