Homophobia and Heterosexism

Homophobia and Heterosexism Berkman and Zinberg's (1997) study "Homophobia and Heterosexism in Social Workers" examines the prevalence of homophobia and heterosexism in social workers. The researchers also correlate the relative homophobia or heterosexism with a variety of other factors such as gender, level of education about homosexuality, level of contact with gay men and lesbians, and religiosity. The authors create their research hypothesis based on prior research; however, much prior research in this area is significantly limited in scope and/or outdated.

Therefore, the current study seeks to address the shortcomings in the literature on this subject matter. Moreover, the authors not only want to assess the rate of homophobia or heterosexism within the American social worker population but also determine whether or not these biases would impact their treatment of gay or lesbian clients. Social workers are employed in the service of others to help them cope with a variety of challenging life situations, from severe illness to spousal abuse.

Therefore, these health care professionals should not bring personal biases to the workplace because it can negatively impact quality of treatment. This study seeks to determine the nature and extent of social workers' homophobic or heterosexist biases. Unfortunately, homophobia and heterosexism are unconscious biases that are difficult to study scientifically; the results of this study are based almost exclusively on self-reports.

According to the authors, homophobia is defined as "fear, disgust, anger, discomfort or aversion" to homosexual people, while heterosexism is defined as a more unconscious but pervasive sense that heterosexuality is a preferable and superior sexual orientation (p. 320). Ethical considerations of this research are clearly addressed by the authors: population samples were random and participation was voluntary. The means to measure homophobia and heterosexism include a range of questionnaires, which pose no harm at all to respondents. Moreover, anonymity and confidentiality were guaranteed.

As the questionnaires were straightforward, there was no need to deceive subjects as to the nature of the study. Findings were thoroughly addressed, even when the results did not corroborate the research hypotheses, and the potential benefits to the study easily outweigh the few, if any, costs involved. These questionnaires were administered randomly to social workers with MSWs, all of whom were members of the NASW; because observations were made at one time, this study is cross-sectional.

One research hypothesis tested in this design was that education regarding homosexuality would have an inverse effect on homophobia or heterosexism. Therefore, the dependent variable in this case is the relative level of homophobia or heterosexism, while the independent variable is amount of education on topics related to homosexuality. Prior research had shown that education about homosexuality led to less homophobia and heterosexism in the target population. However, the current study showed no correlation between education and homophobia.

Berkman and Zinberg note that prior research was unreliable because it did not use an experimental research design; did not use appropriate comparison groups; and only measured short-term affects of education (p. 327). To measure this hypothesis, the researchers designed an Education Scale to determine amount of education or exposure to topics related to homosexuality, either formally through their MSW program or otherwise. The topics these programs might have addressed range from parenting and psychopathology to HIV / AIDS.

Respondents to the questionnaire reported their level of education on each of these topics. This independent variable was then correlated with participants' responses to the attitudinal scales used by the researchers. These scales measured attitudes toward gays, lesbians, and homosexuality in general, and include Hudson and Rickett's Index of Attitudes toward Homosexuals (IAH); and Herek's Attitudes toward Lesbians Scale (ATL) and Attitudes toward Gay Men Scale (ATG). The dependent variables of homophobia and heterosexism were based on these measures.

The authors also included the Marlowe-Crown Social Desirability scale in their research design. The results of this measure determined the degree of response based on cultural expectations. The authors thoroughly link their hypotheses and research findings to prior research, citing a wide range of sources and studies. All the key ethical elements such as anonymity were addressed and there are no significant ethical problems associated with the design of this research. In fact, many of the research hypotheses tested came up with negative results, which were reported and explained.

The authors also point out the limitations of their study, including the low response rate to the questionnaires (just over one half of those sent questionnaires responded to them). This.