Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale

1. Abstract

The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) Scale, conceptualized and developed by social psychologist Gregory M. Herek, represents one of the most extensively validated and widely utilized psychometric instruments in social psychology, sociology, and public health for assessing explicit sexual prejudice among heterosexual individuals. Originally constructed as a 20-item multidimensional inventory comprising two 10-item subscales—the Attitudes Toward Gay Men (ATG) subscale and the Attitudes Toward Lesbians (ATL) subscale—the instrument measures cognitive, evaluative, and affective responses toward same-sex sexual orientation, sexual behavior, and sexual minority individuals. In response to methodological developments and the practical constraints of large-scale epidemiological and public opinion research, psychometrically robust abbreviated versions were subsequently derived, featuring parallel sets of 3, 4, or 5 items per subscale, notably the Revised 5-Item Short Form (ATLG-R-S5). The scale typically employs a 5-, 7-, or 9-point Likert-type response format ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree in self-administered paper and computer surveys, as well as an adapted 4-point response metric for computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) and face-to-face surveys.

Extensive psychometric investigations have affirmed the high internal consistency of the ATLG and its shortened derivatives across diverse populations. Self-administered subscales routinely yield Cronbach’s alpha coefficients exceeding .85 in undergraduate samples and .80 in community and nonstudent adult cohorts, with alternate-form test-retest reliability estimates exceeding .80 over multi-week intervals. Construct, convergent, and discriminant validity are firmly documented: ATLG scores exhibit robust positive correlations with right-wing authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, rigid gender-role adherence, traditional family ideology, and HIV/AIDS stigma, while displaying strong negative associations with interpersonal contact with gay men and lesbians. Furthermore, the instrument effectively discriminates between known groups, differentiating between sexual minority civil rights activists and opponents of protective anti-discrimination legislation. This article delivers an exhaustive psychometric review of the ATLG, detailing its theoretical underpinnings, structural properties, cross-cultural adaptations, scoring mechanics, and empirical utility.

2. Keywords

Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale, ATLG, sexual prejudice, homophobia, Gregory M. Herek, sexual orientation, psychometrics, explicit attitudes, heterosexism, intergroup contact theory, factor analysis, Likert scale

3. Authors

The primary architect and foremost researcher of the Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) Scale is Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of California, Davis. Dr. Herek is internationally recognized for his pioneering scholarship on sexual stigma, sexual prejudice, hate crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) populations, and the social psychological dynamics of HIV/AIDS-related stigma. His theoretical contributions have profoundly shaped contemporary scientific understanding of heterosexism and anti-gay hostility.

Substantial contributions to the revision, psychometric refinement, and modern validation of the shortened parallel forms of the instrument (including the ATLG-R-S5) were conducted in collaboration with Kevin A. McLemore, Ph.D., who completed his doctoral training in social psychology at the University of California, Davis. Dr. McLemore’s research centers on social identity, self-categorization, stigma, and intergroup relations.

Institutional Affiliation and Contact Information:
Department of Psychology
University of California, Davis
One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616-8686, United States
Institutional Web Portal: https://psychology.ucdavis.edu/

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) Scale is to provide a standardized, psychometrically rigorous, and empirically validated measure of heterosexual individuals’ explicit attitudes, evaluative stances, and ideological beliefs concerning gay men and lesbian women. Designed specifically to transcend early, clinically confounding conceptualizations of “homophobia”—which often framed anti-gay sentiment strictly as an individual irrational phobic reaction or clinical pathology—the ATLG operationalizes hostility as a culturally contextualized social attitude and form of intergroup prejudice termed sexual prejudice (Herek, 2000, 2009).

In clinical, counseling, and organizational settings, the ATLG serves as an objective assessment tool to measure baseline attitudes, implicit bias awareness, and educational intervention efficacy. For example, it is widely utilized in medical schools, nursing programs, mental health training clinics, and social work curricula to evaluate cultural competency training, tracking shifts in professional healthcare providers’ evaluative orientations toward sexual minority patients. Given that negative provider attitudes directly correlate with healthcare disparities, discriminatory practices, and compromised clinical rapport, the ATLG provides an indispensable diagnostic benchmark for institutional inclusion efforts.

In academic, sociological, and public health research, the ATLG addresses several theoretical and empirical objectives:

• Target-Specific Disaggregation: Unlike omnibus instruments that conflate attitudes toward male and female homosexuality, the ATLG explicitly separates evaluations of gay men (ATG) from evaluations of lesbians (ATL). This bifurcated structure permits empirical investigation into the asymmetric nature of sexual prejudice, revealing that heterosexual men consistently manifest higher levels of prejudice toward gay men than toward lesbians, whereas heterosexual women exhibit comparatively comparable evaluations across both target groups.
• Measurement of Sociopolitical Ideology: The instrument quantifies public endorsement of civil rights legislation, marriage equality, military service integration, and anti-discrimination policies, serving as a reliable predictor of voting behavior on controversial social ballots.
• Epidemiological and Stigma Research: Within the context of public health, the ATLG (specifically the ATG subscale) is utilized to assess the psychosocial mechanisms linking anti-gay prejudice to HIV-related stigma, medical mistrust, and systemic barriers to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and antiretroviral therapy (ART) access.
• Longitudinal and Interventional Assessment: Because parallel short-form variants (such as the ATLG-R-S5) correlate at r > .95 with the full 20-item inventory, the scale enables rapid, low-burden assessment within complex longitudinal panels, experimental contact-hypothesis trials, and national telephone polling environments without compromising psychometric validity.

5. Psychological Construct

The ATLG measures the multidimensional psychological construct of sexual prejudice, defined conceptually by Herek (2000) as negative attitudes held toward an individual based on their sexual orientation, same-sex sexual behavior, or affiliation with a sexual minority community. Rather than postulating a unitary, monolithic phenomenon, the construct encompasses affective revulsion, moral condemnation, belief in the unnaturalness or deviance of same-sex desire, and support for discriminatory social practices.

Attitudes Toward Gay Men (ATG)

The ATG dimension specifically gauges evaluative and ideological orientations toward male homosexuality and gay men. It captures several distinct facets:

• Moral Condemnation and Devaluation: The belief that sexual and romantic relationships between men violate fundamental moral, ethical, or cosmic orders (e.g., endorsed through statements characterizing male same-sex behavior as “just plain wrong”).
• Visceral Affect and Disgust: Emotional revulsion and negative visceral affect directed toward gay male sexuality (e.g., endorsement of items describing male homosexuals as “disgusting”).
• Pathologization and Perversion: The ideological framing of male homosexuality as a psychological deviation, cognitive pathology, or moral perversion rather than a benign, healthy variant of human diversity.
• Naturalness versus Contrived Lifestyle: The rejection of essentialist biological or natural expressions of male sexuality, viewing it instead as an illegitimate, voluntary choice subject to ethical censure (measured in reverse-scored items endorsing homosexuality as a natural expression or valid alternative lifestyle).

Attitudes Toward Lesbians (ATL)

The ATL dimension mirrors the structural facets of the ATG but targets female homosexuality and lesbian women. Although structurally parallel, the ATL construct operates through distinct social psychological channels:

• Gender-Role Transgression: Anti-lesbian attitudes frequently intersect with perceptions of nonconformity to patriarchal gender roles and traditional feminine domesticity. Lesbians are often evaluated through the dual lens of sexism and sexual stigma.
• Eroticization versus Condemnation: While male evaluators frequently harbor deep affective disgust toward gay male intimacy, their attitudes toward female same-sex sexuality are often confounded by male voyeuristic eroticization, resulting in distinct mean-level scores across subscales.
• Moral and Social Viability: Like the ATG, the ATL measures whether respondents conceptualize female same-sex attraction as inherently unnatural, morally perverted, or socially destabilizing to the nuclear family structure.

The modern parallel construction of the ATLG-R-S5 ensures that the lexical formulation of items across both subscales is identical, with the sole substitution of target terms (“two men” vs. “two women”; “male homosexuals” vs. “female homosexuals [lesbians]”). This strict psychometric equivalence allows researchers to conduct direct, unconfounded paired-sample comparisons to evaluate target-sex discrepancies across heterosexual male and female respondents.

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture undergirding the ATLG Scale draws primarily from Herek’s Neofunctional Theory of Attitudes (Herek, 1986, 1987), integrated with Gordon Allport’s Intergroup Contact Hypothesis (1954) and contemporary theories of Symbolic Prejudice and Social Identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1979).

Neofunctional Attitude Theory

Herek posited that attitudes toward stigmatized outgroups do not emerge in an intellectual vacuum; rather, they serve vital psychological functions for the individual. The ATLG was engineered to reflect the cognitive manifestations of these underlying functional orientations:

• Experiential/Schematic Function: Attitudes derived from direct, personal interpersonal experiences with members of the outgroup. In the absence of positive, personal contact, individuals rely on culturally disseminated negative stereotypes.
• Value-Expressive Function: Attitudes that serve as conduits for asserting core personal values, philosophical tenets, and central identities. In many cases, expressing hostility toward gay men and lesbians affirms an individual’s adherence to conservative religious orthodoxy, strict biblical literalism, or traditional patriarchal social hierarchies.
• Social-Adjustive Function: Attitudes that facilitate social belonging, acceptance, and affiliation within one’s immediate reference group. By expressing shared prejudice, individuals signal conformity to peer norms and avoid social ostracism within heteronormative communities.
• Defensive (Ego-Defensive) Function: Attitudes that protect the individual’s self-concept against internal psychological conflict, anxiety, or unconscious homoerotic impulses. Rooted in psychodynamic principles of projection, ego-defensive prejudice is most acute among individuals who perceive sexual nonconformity as a direct threat to their personal gender identity and masculinity.

Intergroup Contact and Social Categorization

The scale is equally informed by Allport’s contact hypothesis, which contends that direct, cooperative, interpersonal contact between majority and minority group members reduces prejudice under conditions of equal status, common goals, and institutional support. Herek and Capitanio (1996) demonstrated that heterosexual individuals who maintain close personal friendships or familial bonds with openly gay individuals score significantly lower on both the ATG and ATL subscales. The ATLG quantifies the cognitive reframing that occurs when interpersonal exposure deconstructs monolithic, stigmatized outgroup categorizations.

7. Validity

The ATLG Scale and its shortened iterations have undergone comprehensive empirical validation across four decades of international psychological inquiry, demonstrating exceptional construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity.

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity is substantiated by consistent, theoretically predicted correlations with multiple psychological and sociopolitical constructs across diverse demographic cohorts (Herek, 1988, 1994, 2009):

• Authoritarianism and Social Dominance: ATLG scores correlate positively and robustly with Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA; r typically ranging from .45 to .65) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), indicating that sexual prejudice operates as a component of a generalized ideological predisposition favoring traditional hierarchies and outgroup subordination (Whitley, 1999).
• Religiosity and Fundamentalism: Strong positive correlations (r = .40 to .60) are consistently documented between ATLG scores and intrinsic religiosity, religious fundamentalism, and frequent attendance at religious services, specifically among denominations that preach moral condemnation of same-sex behavior.
• Gender-Role Traditionalism: Elevations in ATLG scores correlate substantially with adherence to traditional gender ideologies, hypermasculinity, and negative attitudes toward feminist movements, confirming that sexual stigma is intrinsically tied to the enforcement of rigid binary sex roles (Herek, 1988; Nierman et al., 2007).
• HIV/AIDS Stigma: In public health investigations, the ATG subscale demonstrates pronounced convergent validity with instruments measuring AIDS-related stigma (r > .50), reflecting the social conflation of gay male sexuality with disease culpability (Herek & Capitanio, 1999a).

Discriminant and Known-Groups Validity

The ATLG demonstrates remarkable capacity to distinguish between groups known a priori to occupy opposing ideological poles. In seminal validation trials (Herek, 1988, 1994):

• Active members and leaders of lesbian and gay advocacy organizations scored at the absolute low (supportive) extreme of the scale, demonstrating near-zero sexual prejudice.
• In community field trials evaluating voting behaviors during municipal referenda on gay rights ordinances, nonstudent community residents who actively campaigned against anti-discrimination legal protections scored profoundly higher on both the ATG and ATL subscales than community members who mobilized in support of the civil rights initiative (p < .001).

Cross-Cultural and Linguistic Validity

Cross-cultural investigations have verified the structural invariance and psychometric equivalence of the ATLG across multiple languages and national contexts, including adaptations in the United Kingdom (Hegarty, 2002), Canada (Mohipp & Morry, 2004), the Netherlands (Meerendonk et al., 2003), Singapore (Detenber et al., 2007), Brazil (DeSouza et al., 2007), Chile (Cardenas & Barrientos, 2008), and Turkey (Gelbal & Duyan, 2006). A validated Spanish-language translation administered to Mexican-descent residents in California confirmed robust structural coherence and parallel correlational profiles with traditional family norms (familismo) and religious commitment (Herek & Gonzalez-Rivera, 2006).

8. Reliability

The ATLG Scale and its abbreviated parallel variants exhibit exemplary indices of internal consistency and temporal stability across diverse administrative formats, including paper-and-pencil self-reports, computerized laboratory interfaces, online panels, and computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI).

Internal Consistency

Extensive psychometric evaluations yield the following reliability benchmarks (Herek, 1994; Herek & McLemore, 2013):

• Full 20-Item Scale and 10-Item Subscales: In self-administered formats with undergraduate samples, the total ATLG scale consistently yields Cronbach’s alpha coefficients between .90 and .95. The individual 10-item ATG subscale typically yields α > .90, while the 10-item ATL subscale yields α > .85.
• Adult Community Samples: In broader nonstudent adult probability samples, Cronbach’s alpha routinely exceeds .85 for the overall scale and .80 for the individual subscales.
• Revised 5-Item Subscales (ATLG-R-S5): The parallel 5-item versions demonstrate high internal consistency, with α values consistently exceeding .85 in student samples and ranging from .80 to .88 in general adult telephone and web surveys. Subscale correlations between the 5-item short forms and their original 10-item parent inventories exceed r = .95, confirming that item reduction does not degrade measurement reliability.
• Abbreviated 3-Item Variants (ATLG-R-S3): In brief telephone survey panels, even the 3-item ultra-short variants maintain acceptable reliability, exhibiting alpha coefficients between .70 and .78.

Temporal Stability (Test-Retest Reliability)

Test-retest reliability assessments conducted across varying intervals (ranging from two to four weeks) demonstrate stability coefficients consistently exceeding r = .80 for both the full inventory and its parallel shortened subscales (Herek, 1988, 1994). These findings affirm that the ATLG assesses enduring, crystallized ideological and evaluative structures rather than fleeting, situational mood fluctuations.

9. Factor Analysis

Structural evaluations employing both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) have rigorously established the dimensionality of the ATLG across decades of psychometric inquiry.

Exploratory Factor Structure

Early factor-analytic evaluations of the original 20-item pool via principal axis factoring and principal components analysis with orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations consistently extracted two primary, correlated factors accounting for over 50% to 60% of total variance:

• Factor 1: Attitudes Toward Gay Men (ATG): Comprising items explicitly addressing male homosexuality, same-sex male intercourse, and social perceptions of gay men. Primary factor loadings for core items routinely range from .60 to .85.
• Factor 2: Attitudes Toward Lesbians (ATL): Comprising items evaluating female homosexuality, lesbian relationships, and lesbian community members, with primary loadings similarly spanning .55 to .82.

Factor intercorrelations between ATG and ATL are substantial (typically r = .65 to .80), indicating that while both dimensions reflect an overarching latent construct of general sexual prejudice, they preserve distinct target-specific variance that warrants individual subscale scoring.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Parallel Short Forms

In structural equation modeling (SEM) and CFA investigations, a two-factor oblique model consistently demonstrates superior fit compared to a single-factor unidimensional model. When testing the Revised 5-Item Short Form (ATLG-R-S5), researchers have verified that the parallel item formulation satisfies criteria for metric and scalar measurement invariance across gender groups.

Typical fit indices reported in CFA literature for the two-factor parallel short form include:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Values routinely exceed .95, denoting excellent correspondence with empirical data.
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): Consistently documented above .94.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Estimates typically fall between .04 and .06 (with 90% confidence intervals bounded below .08), demonstrating acceptable to close model fit.
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): Values consistently remain below .04.

Survey Context and Item Order Effects

Methodological research by Herek and Capitanio (1999b) revealed significant survey context and item order effects, particularly among heterosexual male respondents during telephone administrations. When items evaluating lesbians are presented prior to items evaluating gay men, heterosexual men often express moderately attenuated prejudice toward gay men; conversely, when gay male items are administered first, prejudice ratings toward both groups remain elevated. This asymmetric priming phenomenon highlights the cognitive primacy of male anti-gay stigma in traditional masculinity validation.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The technical parameters, administrative procedures, and scoring mechanics for the Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale (ATLG) are structured as follows:

• Instrument Type: Standardized self-report psychometric rating scale; available in written, computerized, and oral/interview-administered formats.
• Target Population: Heterosexual adolescents and adults; suitable for general population, university, and specialized occupational cohorts.
• Primary Recommended Variant: Revised Parallel 5-Item Short Form (ATLG-R-S5), comprising a total of 10 items (5 items for ATG-R-S5; 5 items for ATL-R-S5).
• Ultra-Short Variant: Revised 3-Item Short Form (ATLG-R-S3), comprising 6 items total (3 items per subscale; marked with asterisks in standard item displays).
• Original Form: 20 items (10 non-parallel items for ATG; 10 non-parallel items for ATL). Parallel forms are strongly recommended over the original non-parallel scale.
• Administration Time: Approximately 30 to 60 seconds per item (roughly 5 to 8 minutes for the 10-item parallel scale; 2 to 3 minutes for the 6-item ultra-short form).
• Response Metrics:
  • Self-Administered (Paper/Computer): Typically a 5-, 7-, or 9-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5, 7, or 9 = Strongly Agree.
  • Oral/Telephone Administration: 4-point categorical scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree Somewhat, 3 = Agree Somewhat, 4 = Strongly Agree), with an optional unprompted neutral category (“Neither Agree nor Disagree”).
• Scoring Protocol:
  • Reverse Scoring: Positive or affirming statements must be reverse-scored prior to aggregation so that higher numerical values consistently denote higher levels of sexual prejudice. On a standard 1–7 scale, reverse scoring follows the transformation: New Score = 8 − Original Score.
  • Subscale Aggregation: Calculate separate sum or mean scores for the Attitudes Toward Gay Men (ATG) subscale and the Attitudes Toward Lesbians (ATL) subscale.
  • Mean Metric Calculation: Dividing the subscale sum by the number of completed items (e.g., 5 items) retains the intuitive original Likert metric (e.g., 1 to 7), facilitating direct cross-study comparisons.
  • Total Composite Score: When theoretical hypotheses focus on generalized sexual prejudice, researchers may sum or average across all 10 items to yield an overall ATLG score.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) Scale was developed and published by Gregory M. Herek in 1984, with major structural updates, psychometric reviews, and short-form validations appearing across subsequent decades (Herek, 1988, 1994, 2002, 2009; Herek & McLemore, 2013).

Licensing and Usage Policy:
The ATLG Scale and its authorized revisions are non-commercial, open-access instruments for academic and professional scientific inquiry. Researchers are not required to obtain formal written permission from the authors to reproduce, translate, or administer the ATLG scale in non-commercial, not-for-profit empirical studies, provided that:

• The investigation strictly complies with the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association.
• Appropriate formal academic attribution and citation are accorded to Dr. Gregory M. Herek in all resulting publications, conference presentations, and technical monographs.
• The instrument is not packaged or sold as a proprietary diagnostic assessment without explicit prior contractual agreement.

12. References

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.

Cardenas, M., & Barrientos, J. (2008). The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale (ATLG): Adaptation and testing the reliability and validity in Chile. The Journal of Sex Research, 45(2), 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490801987424

DeSouza, E., Solberg, J., & Elder, C. (2007). A cross-cultural perspective on judgments of woman-to-woman sexual harassment: Does sexual orientation matter? Sex Roles, 56(7–8), 457–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9189-9

Detenber, B. H., Cenite, M., Ku, M. K., Ong, C. P., Tong, H. Y., & Yeow, M. C. (2007). Singaporeans’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men and their tolerance of media portrayals of homosexuality. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19(3), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edm011

Gelbal, S., & Duyan, V. (2006). Attitudes of university students toward lesbians and gay men in Turkey. Sex Roles, 55(7–8), 573–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9104-5

Hegarty, P. (2002). “It’s not a choice, it’s the way we’re built”: Symbolic beliefs about sexual orientation in the US and Britain. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 12(3), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.669

Herek, G. M. (1984). Beyond “homophobia”: A social psychological perspective on attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 10(1–2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v10n01_01

Herek, G. M. (1986). The instrumentality of attitudes: Toward a neofunctional theory. Journal of Social Issues, 42(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1986.tb00226.x

Herek, G. M. (1987). Can be functions be measured? A new perspective on the functional approach to attitudes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(4), 285–303. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786814

Herek, G. M. (1988). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. The Journal of Sex Research, 25(4), 451–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498809551476

Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In B. Greene & G. M. Herek (Eds.), Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 206–228). Sage Publications.

Herek, G. M. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(1), 19–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00051

Herek, G. M. (2002). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(1), 40–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/338630

Herek, G. M. (2009). Sexual stigma and sexual prejudice in the United States: A conceptual framework. In D. A. Hope (Ed.), Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay and bisexual identities: The 54th Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 65–111). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09556-1_4

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1996). “Some of my best friends”: Intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(4), 412–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296224007

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999a). AIDS stigma and sexual prejudice. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(7), 1130–1147. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027649921954822

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999b). Sex differences in how heterosexuals think about lesbians and gay men: Evidence from survey context effects. The Journal of Sex Research, 36(4), 348–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499909552008

Herek, G. M., & Gonzalez-Rivera, M. (2006). Attitudes toward homosexuality among U.S. residents of Mexican descent. The Journal of Sex Research, 43(2), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490609552307

Herek, G. M., & McLemore, K. A. (2013). The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) Scale. In T. D. Fisher, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (3rd ed., pp. 415–418). Routledge.

Meerendonk, B. van de, Eisinga, R., & Felling, A. (2003). Application of Herek’s Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale in the Netherlands. Psychological Reports, 93(1), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2003.93.1.265

Mohipp, C., & Morry, M. M. (2004). The relationship of symbolic beliefs and prior contact to heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 36(1), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087213

Nierman, A. J., Thompson, S., Bryan, A., & Mahaffey, A. L. (2007). Gender role beliefs and attitudes toward lesbians and gay men in Chile and the U.S. Sex Roles, 57(1–2), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9226-8

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.126

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)