This research belongs to a bigger little bit of browse to the classification interactions and you will relevant thinking into the some other societal teams. Most of the participants had been looked at shortly after offering their consent written down. Respondents was in fact hoping anonymity to complete some report-and-pencil questionnaires on the ATLG steps privately. Volunteers gotten extra borrowing from the bank things due to their movement level. The brand new moral standards of the Chilean Look Commission (CONICYT) had been used.
In addition, governmental mind-categorization (inquiring regarding political needs coded into the about three groups: leftover, center and you can correct) and you will sexual orientation was included
People replied market issues to evaluate ATLG validity: gender, many years, socioeconomic standing (large, middle and you can lower levels were used), and religion identity thanks to self-revealing on the way to the question “Do you believe oneself a religious individual?” Additionally, an effective 4-item measure scale on good six-section Likert level regarding the importance users give its spiritual records inside their each day lifetime was used.
It was developed in Northern America. ATLG is measured on a 6-point Likert scale. The instrument was translated and adapted (Cardenas Barrientos, 2008) (see the Appendix). The ATLG Spanish language version in this study had not been used with Chilean populations before. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.94 for ATLG; 0.88 for ATL; and 0.91 for ATG (The ATLG and the two subscales demonstrated good internal consistence for this sample. The correlation for the two subscales is high (r (503) = 0.84; p < 0.001). ATLG overall mean was 3.52 (SD = 0.75).
High (next to 6) ratings showed deeper bias, and reduced scores said positive thinking into the homosexuals
A portion of the mission would be to influence the underlying ATLG foundation construction. So, about three grounds activities have been projected: a single-foundation design (ATLG includes a single homophobia reason for and this all situations saturate); a two-factor coordinated design (one or two proportions constructed of the ATL and you tierfreundliche Dating-Seiten can ATG subscales whose issues is always to saturate in the involved factor try recommended) another purchase model having a few correlated points (in which ATG subscale factors create saturate in 2 proportions – gay Beliefs and you will Characteristics – and those of ATL scale carry out saturate in the other around three – lesbian Traditional Thinking, and you may Societal Sanction and Social Liberties). This type of four proportions have been obtained from analyses done in early in the day studies (Cardenas Barrientos, 2008).
In general, brand new match is the most suitable when model circumstances are improved. For this reason, both-basis second order design is considered the most parsimonious for everyone indexes gotten. CFI (Comparative Boost Directory) and you will NFI (Typical Fit Index) indexes tell you values more than 0.nine, all of them considered very good (Bentler Dudgeon, 1996). RFI (Cousin Augment Directory) worthy of methods 0.9, especially in the 5-basis model. On top of that, RMSEA (Root Mean square Error out-of Approximation) directory are significant having viewpoints lower than 0.08 (Browne Kudeck, 1993), hence verifying an informed complement of your four-basis design.
Table 3 also shows the factor saturations for each of the five sub-scales model items. All standardized saturations were significant (p < 0.001). All of the 20 items of the standardized solution loaded on the general grouping factor in the expected direction. The relation between the five latent factors is as follows (covariance): the dimension Social Rights has a high positive correlation with the factor Nature (r = 0.6); moderate positive with both Social Rights (r = 0.43) and Social Sanction (r = 0.038); and high positive with Traditional Values (r = 0.74). The dimension Nature is moderately and positively correlated with Social Rights (r = 0.32) and Social Sanction (r = 0.35), but highly and positively correlated with Traditional Values (r = 0.61). The relation of the dimension Social Rights with Social Sanction (r = 0.31) and Traditional Values (r = 0.37) is moderate high. Finally, the relation between Traditional Values and Social Sanction is moderate positive (r = 0.43).