Unwanted visibility: The effects of stereotypical gay-themed ads on self-esteem and internal-ised homonegativity in gay and bisexual men
By Marko Markov (11173971)
University of Amsterdam Graduation Project
Group 2
Tutor: dr. Marieke L. Fransen
June 11, 2018 Word count: 6398
Abstract
Advertisers have been targeting the gay and bisexual community for decades, but rapid changes in attitudes toward homosexuality in the West have boosted the volume and explicit-ness of gay-themed ads substantially in the last 20 years. Yet, gay and bisexual representa-tions continue to be highly stereotypical and don’t reflect the diversity in the community. Extant studies point toward a negative impact of stereotypical gay-themed ads on various psychological outcomes in gay and bisexual men, but it is not entirely clear what the effects are. To shed some light on the subject, the present study aimed to investigate whether such ads affect self-esteem and whether internalised homonegativity mediate the effect. In a web experiment, gay and bisexual men living in the Netherlands (N = 67) were randomly assigned to two experimental groups. Participants were exposed to either a photo featuring a stereotyp-ical gay-themed poster ad in a public setting, or the same photo with a non-stereotypstereotyp-ical ad. There was no significant between-group difference in self-esteem, nor did internalised ho-monegativity play a mediating role. Although several possible explanations are suggested, one likely reason for the lack of significant results is flaws in the design of the experiment, namely biased participant self-selection and non-controllable environment. Implications for the different scenarios are discussed.
“When I saw the poster for the first time, I was shocked,” wrote a young gay man from Utrecht (Wing, 2015) referring to an advertisement for a gay dating app which proved controversial not only for heterosexuals (Reklameboek.nl, 2015), but among its target popu-lation as well. The ad, displaying two naked muscular men, publicly invited gay and bisexual men to indulge in “non-stop cruising”. “I hope that most heterosexuals will understand that this distinctive way of advertising is targeted at a select group and does not reflect the whole gay community,” wrote a 31-year-old gay Dutchman about it (Wing, 2015).
For the past three decades, brands in Northern America and Western Europe have been targeting the gay and lesbian market segment with ads for a variety of products, from cereal to cars. With growing acceptance of homosexuality, this type of persuasive communi-cation has spilled over to the mainstream media, too. Television networks, for example, have been attracting gay and straight viewers alike with gay shows such as Will and Grace, Queer as Folk, The L Word and Orange is the New Black, while openly gay entertainers like Ellen DeGeneres and Sam Smith have amassed huge international followings.
These trends have attracted substantial interest in both the business and the academic communities, with studies on gay representation in mass entertainment and advertising being published as far back as the 90s (e.g. Bhat, Leigh, & Wardlow, 1996; Kates, 1999; Steiner, Fejes, & Petrich, 1993). Multiple qualitative studies have found that gay representations in the media have a substantial impact on gay and bisexual people’s sexual identities and on their feeling of self-worth, pride and self-esteem (Evans, 2007; Gomillion & Giuliano, 2011; McInroy & Craig, 2016). While positively perceived images can be beneficial in their jour-neys to self-acceptance and emancipation, negative ones can be detrimental (McInroy & Craig, 2016). Stereotypical images, in particular, pose a threat to the well-being of this mi-nority whose access to role models and sexual identity cues depends largely on the media. This is worrisome, because homosexual people are too often painted in stereotypical brushstrokes in mass media: gay men tend to be presented as feminine (Linneman, 2008), while lesbian women are often depicted as butch (Fejes & Petrich, 1993). Little is known, however, about how outcomes such as self-esteem and internalised homonegativity, i.e. non-heterosexuals’ negative attitudes toward their own sexuality (Meyer, 1995), are affected by stereotypical gay-themed advertising. So far, gay-themed advertising has been studied almost exclusively in the context of content (e.g. Tsai, 2010) and persuasive effectiveness (e.g. Bhat, Leigh, & Wardlow, 1996; Grier & Brumbaugh, 1999; Oakenfull & Greenlee, 2005; Sender, 1999) and there is a notable lack of research on its effects on indicators of psychological
well-being. The current study aims at filling this gap in the literature by answering the ques-tion:
RQ: What is the effect of stereotypical gay-themed ads on internalised homonegativi-ty and self-esteem among gay and bisexual men in the Netherlands?
Considering the proliferation of gay-themed ads and the emergence of exclusively gay-targeted ads in the Dutch mainstream media, the topic is more relevant as ever. Despite being considered a liberal oasis, homophobia is still a very real problem in the Netherlands where young gay people are up to five times more likely to make a suicide attempt than their straight peers (Keuzenkamp et al., 2010). Stereotypical ads can strengthen prejudices toward gay and lesbian people and hinder progress toward their greater acceptance by the heterosex-ual majority (Miller & Lewallen, 2015). Therefore, advertising regulatory bodies, on the one hand, and brands and advertising professionals, on the other, might benefit from deeper un-derstanding of the effects such communication has on the well-being of gay and bisexual people. It would allow them to improve future persuasive messages and avoid potential ad-verse effects. Communication scientists, too, will benefit from gaining further knowledge on the intricate links between social stereotypes, in- and out-group dynamics and persuasive communication.
Theoretical Framework
The media seem especially successful at propagating stereotypes (Eschholz, Bufkin, & Long, 2002). Years of research into minority representation in the media have led commu-nication scientists to two important conclusions. First, minorities have always been and still are substantially underrepresented in mass media (Colfax & Sternberg, 1972; Covert & Dix-on, 2008; Greenberg et al., 2002). And second, minority characters often appear in stereo-typed, marginalised and supporting roles (Bowen & Schmid, 1997; Colfax & Sternberg, 1972; Coltrane & Messineo, 2000). There is evidence that such sparse, biased images can affect self-esteem, defined as one’s sense of personal value and basic appreciation for the self (Rosenberg, 1972), among members of minority groups. Fryberg, Markus, Oyserman, and Stone (2008), for example, found that Native American high-school and college students who were exposed to stereotypical media representations of Native Americans had less positive feelings about their self (i.e. lower self-esteem) compared to their peers in a no-media control
group. In advertising, too, stereotypical portrayals have been shown to hamper self-esteem (Hoplamazian & Knobloch-Westerwick, 2014). Much research has been conducted on the effect of mass media on body self-esteem, including that of gay men. A number of studies have found that gay men’s negative perceptions of their bodies are partly caused by idealised media images of the male body (e.g. Kaminski, Chapman, Haynes, & Own, 2005; Levesque & Vichesky, 2006; Strong, Singh, & Randall, 2000). More recent studies have started to in-vestigate the effect of stereotypical media images on additional dimensions of self-esteem and other constructs related to psychological and emotional well-being, particularly among minorities (e.g. Fryberg et al., 2008). This line of research deserves attention, because self-esteem is one of the key predictors for psychological and emotional well-being and impacts various parts of an individual’s life. It has been linked to learning performance, drug use, early pregnancy, crime, depression and suicide, among other things (Lieberman, Solomon, & Ginzburg, 2005; Mecca, Smelser, & Vasconcellos, 1989).
Among the theories most often used to explain the relationship between stereotypical media representations and self-esteem, Social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1986) has proved particularly useful (e.g. Appiah, Westerwick, & Alter, 2013; Knobloch-Westerwick & Hastall, 2010; Martins & Harrison, 2012). While most other theoretical frameworks view the self-concept as a partial product of an interaction between individuals and the wider society, SIT is concerned with people’s interactions with societal groups. More specifically, groups to which they belong, e.g. the gay in-group, and groups they are not part of, e.g. the straight out-group. Often, in addition to being grounded in an internal point of reference, self-esteem is heavily influenced by comparisons with another person or group (Mecca, Smelser, & Vasconcellos, 1989). SIT theorises that individuals adjust their feelings about the self in response to comparisons with out-groups. This process seems to be especial-ly relevant to members of minority groups because they tend to evaluate the situation of their own group in comparison to those enjoyed by more fortunate societal groups. While it is gen-erally assumed that this psychological mechanism is used to strengthen one’s self-esteem at the expense of an out-group, studies like the one by Fryberg et al. (2008) show that, in the case of minorities, a comparison between the observed image of the in-group and the either observed or perceived image of an out-group can have a disparaging effect on self-esteem. This is particularly true about sexual minorities, which are often pressured to conform to het-eronormative lifestyles, including in the Netherlands (Haney, 2016). There, like in most other places, heterosexual standards for sexual and romantic relationships are seen as ideal and anything different from them is deemed inferior. The resulting unfavourable societal attitudes
toward homosexuality can lead to the internalisation of heterosexual norms by
non-heterosexual individuals who then shy away from or even condemn stereotypical images of gay men that are in conflict with heteronormativity (Aggarwal & Gerrets, 2014; Hekma & Duyvendak, 2011). Therefore, I expect that gay-themed media images which strongly deviate from established heteronormative norms will have a negative impact on gay and bisexual men’s self-esteem. The effect might be particularly strong when the images are directed ex-clusively and explicitly toward gay and bisexual men and are placed in a public context which forces an immediate comparison between the gay in-group and the straight out-group. My first hypothesis is:
H1: Gay and bisexual men exposed to a stereotypical gay-themed ad will have lower self-esteem compared to gay and bisexual men exposed to a non-stereotypical gay-themed ad.
It is likely that the effect of stereotypical media imagery on self-esteem is not a straightforward one. A construct closely related to the internalisation of heteronormative norms is internalised homonegativity, which refers to “negative feelings about one’s homo-sexuality” (Herek, 2004, p. 19). Non-heterosexual individuals who are high on internalised homonegativity not only hold unflattering beliefs about their in-group – they also adopt them as part of their self-conceptions. It has been suggested that most gay, lesbian and bisexual people internalise homonegativity, albeit to a different extent, and that the resulting self-stigmatisation is difficult to mend later in life (Appleby & Anastas, 1998). Similarly to the internalisation of heteronormative norms, internalised homonegativity is the consequence of structural and environmental stigma associated with homosexuality (Berg, Ross, Weather-burn, & Schmidt, 2013; Shidlo, 1994). However, instead of emphasising beliefs about what’s proper and desired, homonegativity underscores everything that is wrong with the gay and bisexual community. The clash between the two can have severe emotional and psychologi-cal repercussions. A recent study (Aggarwal & Gerrets, 2014) found that the much higher rate of emotional disorders observed in Dutch gay men could be caused by internalised ho-monegativity. Among these are anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts – conditions which have been linked to low self-esteem (Orth, Robins, & Widaman, 2012). In a study focused on women, Katz, Joiner, and Kwon (2002) found support for the idea that internalised negative stereotypes about one’s in-group can have a negative impact on self-esteem. In the context of advertising, a laboratory experiment with Muslim youth revealed that exposure to an
anti-Muslim political ad increased perceived discrimination, which in turn decreased individuals' self-esteem (Schmuck, Matthes, & Paul, 2017). Based upon these findings, I expect that ste-reotypical media representations will increase gay and bisexual men’s internalised
ho-monegativity, which in turn will decrease their self-esteem. The second hypothesis to be test-ed in this study is:
H2: The effect of type of ad (stereotypical vs. non-stereotypical) on self-esteem will be mediated by internalised homonegativity.
The two expectations formulated in H1 and H2 are displayed in the form of a concep-tual model in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Conceptual model for the effect of type of ad on self-esteem, mediated by internal-ised homonegativity.
Method
Design and Participants
This study had an experimental design. The experimental method was chosen because it is best suited for investigating causal relationships. A unifactorial between-subjects web-based experiment with 2 conditions (type of ad: stereotypical vs. non-stereotypical) was used. The dependent variable was self-esteem, while internalised homonegativity was a moderator. Participants were recruited primarily through dating mobile applications (Grindr, OkCupid and Planet Romeo), but also convenience sampling was used. In exchange for their participa-tion, they were offered a chance to enter a lottery for one Bol.com gift card worth 50 euro. A total of 96 people started the online survey, of whom 70 completed it. Three of those failed
the attention check designed to verify that participants were reading the questions carefully by instructing them to select a particular answer option. The final sample consisted of 67 non-heterosexual men living in the Netherlands. They were aged 23 to 58 (M = 36.75, SD = 9.27) and identified as either gay (95.5%) or bisexual. About half were born in the Nether-lands (52.2%) and the rest came from 20 countries in Europe, North America, South Ameri-ca, Australia and Asia. The foreigners had been living in the Netherlands for an average of about 5 years (SD = 4.64). At the time of their participation, 81.1% were living in a city of more than 100,000 residents and almost all had completed some level of higher education (26.9% Bachelor, 55.2% Master, 9% PhD). Of the 67 participating men, 37 were single, 22 were partnered and 8 were married or in a registered partnership.
Procedure
Participants were first presented with a short description of the study, which stated that the project’s aim was to generate insight into gay and bisexual men 's attitudes toward dating apps advertisements. After accepting the informed consent, they received instructions and were then randomly assigned to one of the experimental conditions through Qualtrics’ in-built restricted randomisation function which strives for an even number of participants in each condition. Next, the participants were exposed to either a stereotypical or a
non-stereotypical ad for as long as they deemed necessary, but not less than 10 seconds. Immedi-ately after exposure, internalised homonegativity and self-esteem were measured. Finally, the participants answered several filler questions, a manipulation check, an English comprehen-sion check, a question aimed at checking whether they’ve seen the original Squirt ad upon which the stereotypical stimuli material was modelled and a series of demographic questions. The full questionnaire is included in Appendix A. Upon completing the experiment, they were redirected to a separate survey where they were invited to enter the prize draw by providing an e-mail address.
Independent Variable
The independent variable in this study was the level to which the ads displayed ste-reotypes about gay and bisexual men. The steste-reotypes which were manipulated in the exper-iment were the well-documented beliefs that gay and bisexual men are promiscuous and less willing/capable of forming long-term committed relationships (Pinsof & Haselton, 2016). These notions are so deeply entrenched in Western societies that they are included in some measures of internalised homonegativity, such as the Short Internalised Homonegativity
Scale (Currie, Cunningham, & Findlay, 2004). A pretest was conducted to confirm the per-ceived existence of these stereotypes, as well as to test the efficacy of the stimuli materials. The pretest utilised a unifactorial within-subjects design with 4 conditions (type of ad: non-stereotypical vs. somewhat non-stereotypical vs. non-stereotypical vs. very non-stereotypical) and per-ceived presence of stereotypes as the dependent variable. The convenient sample consisted of 22 Bulgarian gay and bisexual men recruited from my personal connections.
Whether the assumed stereotypes were indeed recognised as such by the participants was tested with an evaluation of three separate statements on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Disagree strongly to Agree strongly. The mean scores confirmed that participants per-ceived preference for casual sex (M = 3.64, SD = 0.73), inability to form long-term commit-ted relationships (M = 3.55, SD = 0.78) and excessively high numbers of lifetime sexual part-ners (M = 3.50, SD = 7.40) as stereotypes held by many heterosexual people about gay and bisexual men. The results of this check supported the idea that gay and bisexual men indeed believe that heterosexual people perceive behaviours deviating from established heterosexual norms as typical of gay and bisexual men. These perceived stereotypes were used as the basis for the manipulation of the stimuli materials.
A total of four ads were tested for the extent to which each of them was deemed ste-reotypical. They featured identical graphic elements, composition and fonts. Two of them advertised a non-existing gay dating app called “Bumbl” and represented non-stereotypical ads. They featured the text messages “A Date Can Last a Lifetime” and “Start looking for him today” and used a soft colour scheme. Of them, one showed a picture of two average looking, fully clothed men embracing each other, and the other one had a picture of two ste-reotypically handsome, fully clothed men embracing and kissing each other. The other pair of ads promoted the non-existing gay dating app “Bendr” and were conceived as stereotypical. Those featured the messages “Hookups Round the Clock” and “Find hundreds of horny guys now” and used a colour scheme dominated by saturated red. The first ad showed a waste-up picture of two well-built naked men embracing each other wrapped in the same towel. The second one featured a waist-up picture of three muscular naked men embracing each other. All four ads are included in Appendix B.
The perceived presence of stereotypes in the ads was measured with a single question asking whether the ad displayed stereotypes about gay and bisexual men. This was done be-fore participants were questioned about the existence of specific stereotypes, so as to avoid priming them and biasing their responses. As expected, participants in the pretest rated the first Bumbl ad (BL1) as the least stereotypical (M = 2.05, SD = 0.79) on a 5-point Likert
scale, the second Bumble ad as slightly more stereotypical (M = 2.14, SD = 0.83), the first Bendr ad as substantially more stereotypical (M = 3.55, SD = 0.91) and the second Bendr ad (BR2) as the most stereotypical (M = 3.95, SD = 0.78). The difference between the scores of BL1 and BR2 was substantial (1.9) and significant (p < .001), therefore they were selected for the experiment. BL1 and BR2 were rated roughly the same on two other potentially bias-ing factors – the credibility of the ads (MBL1 = 4.09, SDBL1 = 0.61; MBR2 = 3.91, SDBR2 = 0.61, p = .213) and the attractiveness of the models (MBL1 = 3.45, SDBL1 = 0.91; MBR2 = 3.73, SDBR2 = 0.83, p = .283).
In addition to the pre-testing of the ads, a manipulation check was featured in the final experiment to investigate whether they were perceived as intended in terms of stereotypes. Participants evaluated two statements, one specifically referring to the promiscuity stereotype and one about other negative stereotypes. Answers were recorded on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from Disagree strongly to Agree strongly.
Measures
Internalised homonegativity. This latent concept was measured using the Short In-ternalized Homonegativity Scale (SIHS) developed by Currie, Cunningham, and Findlay (2004). It was preferred over the most widely used scale, the Internalized Homonegativity Inventory (Nungesser, 1983), because the latter was developed 35 years ago and contains extreme items, such as “Sometimes I feel that I might be better off dead than gay” (Currie et al., 2004). The SIHS, in contrast, reflects societal changes toward acceptance of homosexu-ality and has been shown to be reliable in North America (Tran et al., 2017) and in Europe (Morell-Mengual, Gil-Llario, Ballester-Arnal, & Salmerón-Sanchéz, 2016). It consists of 13 items, such as “Even if I could change my sexual orientation I wouldn’t” and “Most gay and bi men cannot sustain a long-term committed relationship”. All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from Disagree strongly to Agree strongly. Items 1, 3, 4, 5 and 12 were reverse-coded. Total score varied from 1.77 to 4.85 (M = 3.14, SD = 0.79), where high-er scores indicate highhigh-er inthigh-ernalised homonegativity. Inthigh-ernal consistency was calculated using Cronbach's alpha and was found to be acceptable (α = .71).
Self-esteem. Generally, self-esteem is a relatively stable disposition (Rosenberg, 1986) and popular measures like Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale (1965) are unlikely to detect small momentary fluctuations. Such changes, however, do occur (Savin-Williams & Demo, 1983). A useful tool for capturing one’s momentary feeling of the self is the State Self-Esteem Scale developed by Heatherton and Polivy (1991). The full scale is made up of three
dimensions of self-esteem – social, appearance and performance self-esteem. Because the first dimension has only been shown to change substantially when participants’ performance expectations are challenged, it was not measured in this study.
The remaining 13 items, such as “I feel that others respect and admire me” (social self-esteem) and “I feel unattractive” (appearance self-esteem), were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from Disagree strongly to Agree strongly. Items 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 were reverse-coded, thus a higher total score indicates higher state self-esteem. The variance in scores was large – from as little as 1.23 to as much as 6.08 (M = 4.11, SD = 1.14). The scale was found to be highly reliable (α = .90). A factor analysis with Direct Oblimin rotation and a fixed number of factors (2) confirmed the presence of the two original dimen-sions. Factor one, social self-esteem, had a high eigenvalue of 6.17 and accounted for 47.44% of the variance in the data. The second factor, appearance self-esteem, had an eigenvalue of 1.67 and accounted for an additional 12.88% of the variance. Both were reliable (α = 0.87 and α = 0.83, respectively).
Results
All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS version 24. I first examined wheth-er the responses of participants in the stwheth-ereotypical ad condition (N = 32) diffwheth-ered based on whether they had seen the original Squirt outdoor ad (N = 6) or not (N = 26). There was a possibility that those who had seen that ad, which closely resembles the stereotypical stimuli material used in the experiment, were less affected by the manipulation. An independent samples t-test revealed no significant differences in homonegativity, t(30) = 1.84, p = .076, and self-esteem, t(30) = 0.11, p = .911, meaning that having seen the original ad had not in-fluenced the responses. These results should be interpreted with caution because the number of observations in both groups was below the required minimum of 30. A similar check for the non-stereotypical ad condition was not necessary because, to the best of my knowledge, that stimuli material does not resemble recently ran poster campaign.
Randomisation Checks
Independent samples t-tests showed that the participants in the two conditions did not differ on age, t(65) = 0.11, p = .914, and years spent in the Netherlands (recorded for those born elsewhere), t(27) = 0.404, p = .689. Similarly, Chi-square tests revealed no significant differences between the groups in terms of size of place of residence (more than 100,000
res-idents vs. less than 100,000), x2(1) = 0.22, p = .641, and relationship status (single vs. part-nered & married), x2(1) = 0.43, p = .514. However, the proportion of respondents born in the Netherlands did vary by condition (stereotypical ad: 34.4%; non-stereotypical ad: 68.6%), x2(1) = 7.84, p = .005, as did level of education (up to technical vs. Bachelor & Master vs. PhD), x2(2) = 7.41, p = .025. Participants in the stereotypical ad condition were more diverse in terms of education (up to technical: 15.6%, Bachelor & Master: 68.8%, PhD: 15.6%) than the rest (2.9%, 94.3% and 2.9%, respectively). These results mean that the two variables might potentially account for the subsequent findings. Therefore, they were included as co-variates in the regression analysis.
Manipulation Check
An independent samples t-test showed that men in the stereotypical ad condition rated the ad they saw much higher on the promiscuity stereotype (M = 5.69, SD = 1.58) compared to those in the non-stereotypical condition (M = 2.11, SD = 1.26), t(65) = 10.31, p < .001, d = 2.56. Similarly, the stereotypical ad was rated as containing significantly more other stereo-types about gay and bisexual men (M = 4.63, SD = 1.79) than the non-stereotypical ad (M = 2.11, SD = 1.26), t(54.97) = 6.59, p < .001, d = 1.78. Based on these results, it is safe to con-clude that the manipulation was successful.
Hypothesis Testing
The expectations were tested with a multiple regression analysis in PROCESS (Model 4) with type of ad (1 = stereotypical ad, 0 = non-stereotypical ad) as the independent variable, self-esteem as the dependent variable and internalised negativity as a mediator. Country of origin (1 = born in the Netherlands, 0 = born outside of the Netherlands) and level of educa-tion (1 = up to technical, 0 = else; 1 = PhD, 0 = else) were included as covariates. The Bache-lor & Master dummy was used as a reference group and was thus left out of the model. The results of the regression analysis are summarised in Table C1 in Appendix C.
Direct effect of type of ad on self-esteem. The first hypothesis (H1) suggests that gay and bisexual men exposed to a stereotypical ad will have lower self-esteem compared to those exposed to a non-stereotypical ad, when controlling for all other variables. The regres-sion model including all variables was significant and explained 21% of the variance in self-esteem, F(5, 61) = 3.25, p = .011, R2 = .21. However, it revealed no significant direct effect of type of ad on self-esteem, b = 0.50, t = 1.74, p = .088, 95% CI [-0.08, 1.08]. A t-test con-firmed that self-esteem among participants who were exposed to the stereotypical ad (M =
4.29, SD = 0.91) was not significantly different from that among those who saw the non-stereotypical ad (M = 3.97, SD = 1.30), t(60.96) = -1.10, p = .276, 95% CI [-0.85, 0.25]. An attempt was made to test the hypothesis using the two dimensions comprising the self-esteem scale. No significant effect of type of ad on social self-esteem was observed, b = 0.58, t = 1.74, p = .088, 95% CI [-0.09, 1.26], nor an effect of type of ad on appearance self-esteem, b = 0.41, t = 1.32, p = .193, 95% CI [-0.21, 1.03]. H1 was therefore rejected.
Mediating role of internalised homonegativity. The second hypothesis (H2) states that internalised homonegativity mediates the effect of type of ad on gay and bisexual men’s selfesteem. Internalised homonegativity was significantly correlated with selfesteem, b = -0.44, t = -2.65, p = .010, 95% CI [-0.77, -0.11]. For every unit increase in homonegativity, self-esteem decreased by 0.44. However, the regression model with type of ad as the inde-pendent variable and internalised homonegativity as the deinde-pendent variable was not signifi-cant, F(4, 62) = 0.32, p = .942, R2 = .01. It showed that homonegativity was not affected by the type of ad participants saw, b = -0.13, t = -0.58, p = .565, 95% CI [-0.57, 0.32]. An inde-pendent samples t-test confirmed that men in the stereotypical ad condition (M = 3.06, SD = 0.78) did not differ on this variable compared to those in the non-stereotypical ad condition (M = 3.22, SD = 0.80), t(65) = 0.80, p = .425, 95% CI [-0.23, 0.54]. Finally, homonegativity did not mediate the relationship between type of ad and self-esteem, b = 0.06, SE = 0.11, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.34]. H2 was thus rejected as well.
Country of origin and level of education as covariates. The regression analysis re-vealed that whether participants were born in the Netherlands or not significantly predicted their self-esteem, b = 0.64, t = 2.32, p = .024, 95% CI [0.09, 1.18]. Those who were born in the Netherlands had a more positive attitude towards themselves (M = 4.31, SD = 1.15) com-pared to those born elsewhere (M = 3.89, SD = 1.10). The analysis also showed that level of education did not influence the outcome variable. Self-esteem among participants with up to technical education did not differ significantly compared to that among those with a Bachelor or Master diploma, b = -0.71, t = -1.51, p = .136, 95% CI [-1.64, 0.23]. Neither did the aver-age self-esteem of participants with a PhD degree, b = 0.30, t = 0.64, p = .528, 95% CI [-0.64, 1.23].
Conclusion and Discussion
This experimental study aimed to investigate the effects of stereotypical gay-themed ads on gay and bisexual men’s self-esteem. It was hypothesised that stereotype-laden ads will
lead to lower self-esteem and that the effect will be mediated by internalised homonegativity. The statistical analysis, however, did not provide support for either of these expectations. Self-esteem was not affected by the type of ad participants saw, nor did internalised ho-monegativity play a mediating role in that relationship. Yet, a negative relationship between internalised homonegativity and self-esteem was observed.
Despite sound theoretical justification and promising past empirical studies, the cur-rent study was unable to observe the expected effects. One possible explanation is that there is simply no causal relationship between stereotypical gay-themed advertising and gay and bisexual men’s feelings about themselves and their sexuality. Such conclusion would lift the burden of responsibility from the shoulders of advertisers, regulators and policymakers, and would free up room for bolder advertising not restrained by considerations about the well-being of the non-heterosexual community. It would also inform scientists about some poten-tially unwarranted assumptions regarding the “exemption” of certain minorities from the psy-chological processes described by the Social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). SIT stipulates that individuals tend to compare their in-group to other groups to increase their own self-esteem. While it has been suggested that such comparisons can lead to negative out-comes when made by people belonging to marginalised groups, this might not be the case with non-heterosexual people. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and queer participants in a qualitative study conducted by McInroy and Craig (2016) admitted that even highly stereotypical, one-dimensional non-heterosexual characters had been helpful for their coming to terms with their own identities. This suggests that gay and bisexual people’s need for public affirmation can mute the negative effects of stereotypical representations. There is, in fact, an indication for such process in the results of the current study as well. While no significant between-group differences were found, participants in the stereotypical ad conditions did exhibit slightly lower internalised homonegativity and slightly higher self-esteem compared to those in the non-stereotypical ad condition.
The possibility also exists that there are real effects of stereotypical ads on internal-ised homonegativity and/or self-esteem, but this study has failed to detect them. There are numerous reasons to believe that the study’s shortcomings, rather than the objective reality, are largely responsible for the unexpected results. These are discussed further below. Another possible factor masking an existing effect might be the high average age of the participants (37). With 70% of them aged 30 and higher and the youngest being 23 years old, a large and important sub-demographic is missing from the study. Research has shown that age is a sig-nificant predictor of well-being and internalised homonegativity, with older gay and bisexual
people having more positive self-concepts and attitudes toward their own sexual orientation (Moleiro, Pinto, & Freire, 2013). It is possible that there is an effect of stereotypical ads on self-esteem and internalised homonegativity, but only on adolescents and/or emerging adults. Such conclusion would be particularly worthy of attention, as non-heterosexual youth is al-ready a very vulnerable group which needs all the support and protection it can get from poli-cymakers and regulators, but also from advertisers and communication professionals.
Overall, the multiple possible explanations make it paramount that the results of the current study are scrutinised in the context of prior research and this study’s limitations. Sci-ence is an unperfect process of slow knowledge building through trial and error and no single study can be seen as the definitive answer to a question, especially not in the fluid, ever-changing field of communication.
The study did find support for the expected relationship between internalised ho-monegativity and self-esteem. Extant research shows that low self-esteem is common among marginalised groups, including sexual minorities (Cass, 1979; Coleman, 1982; Greene & Britton, 2012). Gay men with high internalised homonegativity have been found to be partic-ularly vulnerable to experiencing shame and low self-esteem (Allen & Oleson, 1999; Greene & Britton, 2012). It has been suggested that the relationship between negative feelings about being gay or bisexual and low self-esteem is the product of other variables, such as societal stigma, discrimination and stress (Frable, Wortman, & Joseph, 1997; Savin-Williams, 1990). By corroborating the existence of such relationship, this study has some important implica-tions. Efforts to help gay and bisexual men struggling with low self-esteem and associated negative outcomes should take into account their attitudes toward their own sexual orienta-tion. Universal approaches such as working on one’s childhood experiences, family dynam-ics, etc. might still be valuable, but internalised stigma should be recognised as a very real and impactful contributor to non-heterosexual men’s mental and emotional issues.
Limitations
The foremost limitation of the current study was its sample. Not only did online self-selection lead to a significantly older sample which might have contributed to the unexpected results, but there is also reason to believe that younger people systematically avoided taking part in the experiment. Even though recent research from the US shows that the majority of gay and bisexual boys aged 14 to 17 are using dating apps (Macapagal et al., 2018), not a single person under 23 chose to participate. The addition of a financial reward was designed to attract younger people because they generally have smaller income, but the strategy failed.
It might be that the highly sexual environment typical of gay dating aps makes young men cautious of having their sexual orientation or dating behaviour exposed. A solution might be to recruit younger participants through more casual channels, such as social media.
Furthermore, the way the experiment was conducted effectively meant losing all con-trol over where and how participants took part in it. Detailed instructions were provided, en-couraging them to focus their full attention on the questions and to take their time when viewing the stimuli material. They were also asked to use a device different from a smartphone because a small screen might hinder the effectiveness of the stimuli material which featured small text. Still, despite these efforts, it was impossible to enforce those in-structions, which is a serious threat to the environmental validity of the experiment. Future research that is characterised by high sensitivity to the environment and the devices used by participants should avoid the autonomous online approach and opt for more control. On a positive note, the observed relationship between internalised homonegativity and self-esteem indicates that participants paid attention to the questions and gave consistent answers.
Another limitation lies in the nature of the concepts that were manipulated and the measuring approach. Internalised homonegativity and self-esteem are relatively stable con-cepts which might be difficult to change rapidly. While the State Self-Esteem Scale (SSES; Heatherton & Polivy, 1991) has been shown to detect momentary changes in self-esteem, it is usually employed in research involving strong manipulated experiences, such as aggression, stressful events and provocation of loneliness (e.g. Bozorgpour & Salimi, 2012; Orth & Luci-ano, 2015; Strelan & Zdaniuk, 2014). The manipulation in the current study, however, was never intended to be of such magnitude, which might have rendered its effects undetectable by the SSES. The Short Internalised Homonegativity Scale (Currie et al., 2004), on the other hand, by design measures a stable condition. I tried to overcome this problem by explicitly inviting participants to think about their emotions “at this moment” and “right now”, but it is possible that this was not enough. A more general solution to this issue would be measuring
implicit forms of internalised homonegativity and self-esteem, rather than their explicit
mani-festations. Previous research has shown that there often exist differences between explicit and implicit attitudes, with the latter detecting automatic responses outside the reach of the for-mer (Nosek & Smyth, 2007). Internalised homonegativity, too, can appear in an explicit or an implicit form (Jellison, McConnell, & Gabriel, 2004). A gay man can consciously display a positive attitude toward his sexual orientation, while still holding negative associations with it. The Implicit Association Test (IAT; Nosek, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2007) is a widely used tool for capturing implicit attitudes by asking participants to classify fast-appearing on the
screen words in different categories associated with a positive or a negative valance. The test has been adapted into both a Self-Esteem IAT (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000) and a Sexual Orientation IAT (Nosek et al., 2007). The technical complexity of this approach, however, prevented me from employing it in the current study. More resourceful projects should take advantage of it.
Recommendations for Future Research
The results of this study pose more questions than they answer. It remains unclear whether stereotypical gay-themed ads affect self-esteem and whether the effect is mediated by internalised homonegativity. In addition, the moderating role of age is a promising alley for exploration, because there is reason to expect that younger gay and bisexual men are more vulnerable to stereotypical advertising. Furthermore, this study focused on outdoor ads in a casual public setting, but it would be interesting to investigate whether ads placed in different contexts will elicit different responses. It has been shown that members of minority groups scan their immediate environment for potential threatening identity contingencies and re-spond accordingly (Purdie-Vaughns, Steele, Davies, Ditlmann, & Crosby, 2008). Based on these findings, it might be expected that an ad placed at a location perceived by gay and bi-sexual men as threatening, such as a football stadium, will lead to higher internalised homo-phobia and lower self-esteem compared to an ad at a gay-friendly location, such as a hipster café. Finally, future studies should also examine the effects of stereotypical gay-themed ads in regions where high levels of internalised homonegativity and related negative psycho-emotional outcomes are much more common than they are in the Netherlands. In Eastern Europe, for example, where gay and bisexual people have been found to suffer from in-creased anxiety and depression linked to homonegativity (Parker, Lõhmus, Mangine, & Rüütel, 2016), a public invitation to “non-stop cruising” might provoke a much stronger re-sponse.
In recent years, the media have passionately embraced gay, lesbian and bisexual peo-ple. While busy with studying this rapid progress, however, researchers shouldn’t forget to pay close attention to the community itself and its complex means of dealing with a changing world.
References
Aggarwal, S., & Gerrets, R. (2014). Exploring a Dutch paradox: An ethnographic investiga-tion of gay men’s mental health. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 16(2), 105–119. doi:10.1080/13691058.2013.841290
Allen, D. J., & Oleson, T. (1999). Shame and internalized homophobia in gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 37(3), 33–43. doi:10.1300/J082v37n03
Appiah, O., Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Alter, S. (2013). Ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation: Effects of news valence, character race, and recipient race on selective news reading. Journal of Communication, 63(3), 517–534. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12032 Appleby, G. A., & Anastas, J. W. (1998). Not just a passing phase: Social work with lesbian,
gay, and bisexual people. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Bhat, S., Leigh, T. W., & Wardlow, D. L. (1996). The effect of homosexual imagery in ad-vertising on attitude toward the ad. Journal of Homosexuality, 31(1-2), 161–176. doi:10.1300/J082v31n01_10
Berg, R. C., Ross, M. W., Weatherburn, P., & Schmidt, A. J. (2013). Structural and environ-mental factors are associated with internalised homonegativity in men who have sex with men: Findings from the European MSM Internet Survey (EMIS) in 38 countries. Social Science & Medicine, 78(1), 61–69. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.11.033 Bowen, L., & Schmid, J. (1997). Minority presence and portrayal in mainstream magazine
advertising: An update. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(1), 134– 146. doi: 10.1177/107769909707400111
Bozorgpour, F., & Salimi, A. (2012). State self-esteem, loneliness and life satisfaction. Pro-cedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69(1), 2004–2008.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.157
Cass, V. C. (1979). Homosexuality identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Ho-mosexuality, 4(3), 219–235. doi:10.1300/J082v04n03_01
Coleman, E. (1982). Developmental stages of the coming-out process. In W. Paul, J. D. Weinrich, J. C. Gonsiorek, & M. E. Hotvedt (Eds.), Homosexuality: Social, psycho-logical and biopsycho-logical issues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Colfax, J. D., & Sternberg, S. F. (1972). The perpetuation of racial stereotypes: Blacks in mass circulation magazine advertisements. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(1), 8–17. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2747512
Coltrane, S., & Messineo, M. (2000). The perpetuation of subtle prejudice: Race and gender imagery in the 1990s television advertising. Sex Roles, 42(5–6), 363–389. doi: 10.1023/A:1007046204478
Covert, J. J., & Dixon, T. L. (2008). A changing view: Representation and effects of the por-trayal of women of color in mainstream women’s magazines. Communication Re-search, 35(2), 232–256. doi:10.1177/0093650207313166
Currie, M. R., Cunningham, E. G., & Findlay, B. M. (2004). The short internalized ho-monegativity scale: Examination of the factorial structure of a new measure of inter-nalized homophobia. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(6), 1053– 1067. doi:10.1177/0013164404264845
Eschholz, S., Bufkin, J., & Long, J. (2002). Symbolic reality bites: Women and racial/ethnic minorities in modern film. Sociological Spectrum, 22(3). 299–334. doi:
10.1080/02732170290062658
Evans, V. D. (2007). Curved TV: The impact of televisual images on gay youth. American Communication Journal, 9(3). Retrieved from
http://ac-journal.org/journal/2007/Fall/5CurvedTV.pdf
Fejes, F., & Petrich, K. (1993). Invisibility, homophobia, and heterosexism: Lesbians, gays, and the media. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 10(4), 396–422. doi: 10.1080/15295039309366878
Frable, D. E. S., Wortman, C., & Joseph, J. (1997). Predicting self-esteem, well-being, and distress in a cohort of gay men: The importance of cultural stigma, personal visibility, community networks, and positive identity. Journal of Personality, 65(3), 599–624. Fryberg, S. A., Markus, H. R., Oyserman, D., & Stone, J. M. (2008). Of warrior chiefs and
Indian princesses: The psychological consequences of American Indian mascots. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 30(1), 208–2018.
doi:10.1080/01973530802375003
Gomillion, S. C., & Giuliano, T.A. (2011). The influence of media role models on gay, lesbi-an, and bisexual identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 58(3), 330–354.
doi:10.1080/00918369.2011.546729
Greenberg, B. S., Mastro, D., & Brand, J. (2002). Minorities and the mass media: Television in the 21st century. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 333–351). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Greene, D. C., & Britton, P. J. (2012). Stages of sexual minority identity formation: The
personal mastery. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 16(1), 188–214. doi:10.1080/19359705.2012.671126
Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000). Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 1022–1038. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.1022
Grier, S., & Brumbaugh, A. (1999, Spring). Noticing cultural differences: Ad meanings cre-ated by target and non-target markets. Journal of Advertising, 28(1), 79–93. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/journal/jadve
Haney, J. L. (2016). Predictors of homonegativity in the United States and the Netherlands using the fifth wave of the world values survey. Journal of Homosexuality, 63(10), 1355–1377. doi:10.1080/00918369.2016.1157997
Heatherton, T. F. & Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 895-910. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895
Hekma, G. & Duyvendak, J. W. (2011). Gay men and lesbians in the Netherlands. In: M. Tremblay, D. Paternotte and C. Johnson (Eds.) The lesbian and gay movement and the state (pp. 103–118). Farnham: Ashgate
Herek, G. M. (2004). Beyond ‘homophobia’: Thinking about sexual prejudice and stigma in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 1(2), 6–24. doi: 10.1525/srsp.2004.1.2.6
Hoplamazian, C. J. & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2014). The color of their collar: Effects of social status portrayal in advertising on self-esteem. Howard Journal of Communica-tions, 25(4), 378–398. 10.1080/10646175.2014.955930
Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: In group preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(5), 629– 642. doi:10.1177/0146167203262076
Kaminski, P. L., Chapman, B. P., Haynes, S. D., & Own, L. (2005). Body image, eating be-haviors, and attitudes toward exercise among gay and straight men. Eating Behav-iors,6(3), 179–187. doi:10.1016/jeatbeh.2004.11.003
Kates, S. M. (1999). Making the ad perfectly queer: Marketing "normality" to the gay men's community? Journal of Advertising, 28(1), 25–37. Retrieved from
Katz, J., Joiner, T.E., & Kwon, P. (2002). Membership in a devalued social group and emo-tional well-being: Developing a model of personal self-esteem, collective self-esteem, and group socialization. Sex Roles, 47(9–10), 419–431.
doi:10.1023/A:1021644225878
Keuzenkamp, S., van Bergen, D., Bos, D., Bos, H., Duyvendak, J. W., Ehrhart, J., Felten, H., van Gelderen, L., Hekma, G., van Hoof, J., Hospers, H., van Lisdonk, J., & Schuyf, J. (2010). Steeds gewoner, nooit gewoon: Acceptatie van homoseksualiteit in Neder-land. Retrieved from Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau Website:
https://www.scp.nl/Publicaties/Alle_publicaties/Publicaties_2010/Steeds_gewoner_no oit_gewoon
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Hastall, M. R. (2010). Please your self: Social identity effects on selective exposure to news about in- and out-groups. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 515–535. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01495.x
Levesque, M. J., & Vichesky, D. R. (2006). Raising the bar on the body beautiful: An analy-sis of the body image concerns of homosexual men. Body Image, 3(1), 45–55. doi:10.1016/j/bodyim.2005.10.007
Lieberman, Z., Solomon, Z., & Ginzburg, K. (2005). Suicidal ideation among young adults: Effects of perceived social support, self-esteem, and adjustment. Journal of Loss and Trauma 10(2), 163–181. doi:10.1080/15325020590908867
Linneman, T. J. (2008). How do you solve a problem like Will Truman?: The feminization of gay masculinities on Will & Grace. Men & Masculinities, 10(5), 583–603. doi:
10.1177/1097184X06291918
Martins, N., & Harrison, K. (2012). Racial and gender differences in the relationship between children’s television use and self-esteem: A longitudinal panel study. Communication Research, 39(3), 338–357. doi:10.1177/0093650211401376
Macapagal, K., Moskowitz, D. A., Li, D. H., Carrión, A., Bettin, E., Fisher, C. B., & Mus-tanski, B. (2018). Hookup app use, sexual behavior, and sexual health among adoles-cent men who have sex with men in the United States. Journal of Adolesadoles-cent Health, 62(6), 708–715, doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.01.001
McInroy, L. B., & Craig, S. L. (2016). Perspectives of LGBTQ emerging adults on the depic-tion and impact of LGBTQ media representadepic-tion. Journal of Youth Studies, 20(1), 32– 46. doi:10.1080/13676261.2016.1184243
Mecca, A., Smelser, N. J., & Vasconcellos, J. (1989). The social importance of self-esteem. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Meyer, I. (1995). Minority stress and mental health in gay men. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36(1), 38–56. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2137286
Miller, B., & Lewallen, J. (2015). The effects of portrayals of gay men on homonegativity and the attribution of gender-based descriptors. Communication Studies, 66(3), 358– 377. doi:10.1080/10510974.2015.1018446
Moleiro, C., Pinto, P. & Freire, J. (2013). Effects of age on spiritual well-being and ho-monegativity: Religious identity and practices among LGB persons in Portu-gal. Journal of Religion, Spirituality & Aging, 25(2), 93–111.
doi:10.1080/15528030.2012.741561
Morell-Mengual, V., Gil-Llario, M. D., Ballester-Arnal, R., & Salmerón-Sanchéz, P. (2016). Spanish adaptation and validation of the Short internalized homonegativity scale (SIHS). Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 43(4), 298–305.
doi:10.1080/0092623X.2016.1149128
Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In J. A. Bargh (Ed.), Social psychol-ogy and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental processes (pp. 265–292). New York: Psychology Press.
Nosek, B. A., & Smyth, F. L. (2007). A multitrait-multimethod validation of the Implicit As-sociation Test: Implicit and explicit attitudes are related but distinct constructs. Exper-imental Psychology, 54(1), 14–29. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.54.1.14
Nungesser, L. G. (1983). Homosexual acts, actors, and identities. New York, NY: Praeger. Oakenfull, G. K., & Greenlee, T. B. (2005). Queer eye for a gay guy: Using marketspecific symbols in advertising to attract gay consumers without alienating the mainstream. Psychology & Marketing, 22(5), 421–439. doi:10.1002/mar.20066
Orth U., & Luciano E. C. (2015). Self-esteem, narcissism, and stressful life events: Testing for selection and socialization. Journal of Personality and Social. Psychology, 109(4), 707–721. doi:10.1037/pspp0000049
Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Widaman, K. F. (2012). Life-span development of
self-esteem and its effects on important life outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1271–1288. doi:10.1037/a0025558
Pinsof, D., & Haselton, M. G. (2016). The political divide over same-sex marriage: mating strategies in conflict? Psychological Science, 27(4), 435–442.
Parker, D. R., Lõhmus, L., Mangine, C., & Rüütel, K. (2016). Homonegativity and associated factors among men who have sex with men in Estonia. Journal of Community Health, 41(4), 717–23. doi: 10.1007/s10900-015-0145-7
Purdie-Vaughns, V., Steele, Ca., Davies, P. G., Ditlmann, R., & Crosby, Jr. (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Ameri-cans in mainstream institutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 615–630. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.615
Reclameboek. (2015, December 2). Voldoende terughoudendheid betracht in poster Squirt.org, geen strijd met goede smaak of fatsoen. Reclameboek. Retrieved from http://www.reclameboek.nl
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-versity Press.
Rosenberg, M. (1972). Society and the adolescent self-image (3rd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Prince-ton University Press.
Rosenberg, M. (1986). Self-concept from middle childhood through adolescence. In J. Suls and A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on the self: Vol. 3 (pp. 107– 135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Savin-Williams, R. (1990). Gay and lesbian youth: Expressions of identity. New York: Hem-isphere.
Savin-Williams, R. C., & Demo, D. H. (1983). Conceiving or misconceiving the self: Issues in adolescent self-esteem. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 3(1–2), 121–140. doi:10.1177/027243168331009
Schmuck, D., Matthes, J., & Paul, Fh. (2017). Negative stereotypical portrayals of Muslims in right-wing populist campaigns: Perceived discrimination, social identity threats, and hostility among young Muslim adults. Journal of Communication, 67(4), 610– 634. doi: doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12313
Sender, S. (1999). Selling sexual subjectivities: Audiences respond to gay window advertis-ing. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 16(2), 172-196.
doi:10.1080/15295039909367085
Shidlo, A. (1994). Internalized homophobia: Conceptual and empirical issues in measument. In B. Greene & G. M. Herek (Eds.), Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, re-search and clinical applications (pp. 176–205). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Steiner, L., Fejes, F., & Petrich, K. (1993). Invisibility, homophobia and heterosexism: Les-bians, gays and the media. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 10(4), 395–422. doi:10.1080/15295039309366878
Strelan, P, & Zdaniuk, A. (2014). Threatened state self-esteem reduces forgiveness. Self and Identity, 14(6), 1–17. doi:10.1080/15298868.2014.889034
Strong, S. M., Singh, D., & Randall, P. K. (2000). Childhood gender nonconformity and body dissatisfaction in gay and heterosexual men. Sex Roles, 43(7–8), 427–439.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall.
Tran, H., Ross, M. W., Diamond, P. M., Berg, R. C., Weatherburn, P., & Schmidt, A.
J. (2017). Structural validation and multiple group assessment of the short internalized homonegativity scale in homosexual and bisexual men in 38 European countries: Re-sults from the European MSM Internet Survey. Journal of Sex Research, 55(4-5), 617–629. doi:10.1080/00224499.2017.1380158
Tsai, W-H. S. (2010). Representations of lesbians, gay men, bisexual, and transgender people in mainstream advertising. Advertising & Society Review, 11(1). doi:
10.1353/asr.0.0042
Appendix A
Questionnaire (English version)
Appendix B Stimuli materials
Appendix C
Results of the regression analysis Table C1
Unstandardised effects in a model regressing self-esteem on type of ad (stereotypical) with internalised homonegativity as a mediator and country of origin (Netherlands) and level of education (Up to technical, PhD) as covariates.
95% Confidence Interval
b Lower Higher
Outcome: Internalised homonegativity
Constant 3.21*** 2.82 3.61
Stereotypical ad -0.13 -0.57 0.32
Born in the Netherlands 0.01 -0.41 0.43
Up to technical education -0.05 -0.77 0.67 PhD degree -0.14 -0.86 0.58 R2 0.01 F (4, 62) 0.19 Outcome: Self-esteem Constant 4.95*** 3.77 6.13 Internalised homonegativity -0.44* -0.77 -0.11 Stereotypical ad 0.50 -0.08 1.08
Born in the Netherlands 0.64* 0.09 1.18
Up to technical education -0.71 -1.64 0.23 PhD degree 0.30 -0.64 1.23 R2 0.21 F (5, 61) 3.25* Indirect Effect Stereotypical ad > Internalised homonegativity > Self-esteem 0.06 -0.12 0.34
Note. N = 67. Ordinary least squares estimates for direct effects; bootstrap results for
indirect effects, using 5,000 bootstraps and a bias-corrected method. * p < .050, ** p < .010, *** p < .001.
