This study examined potential biases based on sexual orientation and political orientation. Participants read one of three scenarios about a physical altercation between students where one was identified as heterosexual or homosexual. They then answered questions about fairness of the outcome. Researchers hypothesized that liberals would exhibit bias in favor of homosexuals and conservatives would exhibit bias against homosexuals. Results found no significant bias by conservatives, but indirect support for liberals displaying bias against the heterosexual student. The goal was to extend research on relationships between political orientation and biases like those involving race, to biases regarding sexual orientation.

1. Running head: BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 1
An Examination of Bias as a Function of Political Orientation
and the Sexual Orientation of the Targets
Shannon R. Caldwell, Luke W. Liddell, Sarah E. Maxam,
Susan E. Rada, and Sean A. Ransonette
University of Central Arkansas

2. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 2
Abstract
This study attempted to find support for a connection between political attitudes and sexuality
biases. Hypotheses predicted that conservatives would exhibit a bias against homosexuality
while liberals would exhibit a bias in favor of homosexuality. Participants were presented with
one of three scenarios involving differences in sexuality, followed by questions pertaining to the
fairness of each scenario. Then participants completed a survey using a political scale to
measure their political attitudes. Although no significant bias was displayed by conservatives,
indirect support was found for the second hypothesis. Liberals displayed an apparent bias against
a heterosexual student.

3. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 3
An Examination of Bias as a Function of Political Orientation
and the Sexual Orientation of the Targets
Matthew Shepard was twenty-one years old when he was found tied to a fence in rural
Wyoming. He was found unconscious and covered in blood. When Shepard arrived at the
hospital, surgeons discovered that the brain damage he suffered was so extreme that even surgery
could not return him to his original state. He was kept on full life support for a few days until he
passed away. An investigation later revealed Matthew Shepard had been violently beaten and
tortured by two peers who had targeted him for being homosexual. Because of his murder,
controversy over discrimination based on sexuality arose across the nation.
A decade after his murder, the Matthew Shepard Act was drafted and signed into law by
President Barack Obama. This act declared that crimes committed on the basis of perceived
gender, gender identity, disability, or sexual orientation would be considered “hate crimes”
(“Matthew’s Story”, 2014). A “hate crime” is (usually) a violent offense committed against an
individual based on the perpetrator’s prejudice and belief that the victim subscribes to a specific
social group (Stotzer, 2007).
Homosexual individuals are gaining momentum in their efforts to secure marriage
equality. Seventeen states have explicitly granted same-sex couples the right to marry. The states
with same-sex marriage bans are being taken to court on the basis that these bans are
unconstitutional (“States With Legal Gay Marriage”, 2014). In the summer of 2013, the United
States Supreme Court eradicated section three of the Defense of Marriage Act which stated that
the federal government could not recognize gay marriages (“DOMA”, 2013). Because many of
these changes have occurred within the last two years, it is pertinent to study potential biases
based on sexual orientation, specifically, homosexuality.

4. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 4
In the United States, there are two very distinct sides of the homosexuality debate.
Liberal individuals typically support equality for homosexuals. Most support same-sex-marriage,
and many participate in activist groups attempting to procure these marriage rights for
homosexual individuals. Liberals often view those opposed to homosexual equality as being
close-minded and bigoted. Conservative individuals, in contrast, typically do not support
marriage equality for homosexuals. They tend to prefer tradition, and many of them have
upbringings in religious affiliations that believe homosexual sex to be inherently wrong.
Conservatives often view those supporting homosexual equality as a threat to the sanctity of
marriage as an institution (“Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs”, 2010).
Existing biases within political orientations have been studied extensively in the past.
Most of these studies have examined the relationship between political orientation and the
presence of racial prejudice. Nail, Harton, and Decker (2003, Experiment 1) examined this by
presenting groups of Caucasian participants with scenarios describing an incident between a
motorist and a police officer. In the scenarios, the motorist was assaulted by a police officer.
Originally, the officer was acquitted, but at the federal level he was retried and convicted. The
experimental scenarios identified the motorist as European American and the police officer as
African American (or vice versa). Participants were then asked if they believed the scenario
represented a violation of the constitutional protection from double jeopardy. They were then
asked their political orientation.
Results indicated conservatives rated double jeopardy more so for the European
American officer than for the African American officer. Liberals responded with opposite views.
This provides support for the theory that conservatives will exhibit a bias against minorities if the
act goes undetected. It also provides support for the idea that liberals overcompensate for

5. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 5
subconscious, negative race-based feelings by exhibiting a bias in favor of minorities (Dovidio &
Gaertner, 1998). We predicted that the results from Nail et al. (2003) could be applicable to other
forms of bias, such as those based on differences in sexuality, that have not been studied as
extensively as racial prejudice.
We utilized three different scenarios to measure this potential bias. These scenarios were
designed to create a situation with ambiguous fairness. These scenarios will create the
appearance of discrimination being committed against a heterosexual or homosexual student.
Participants will then evaluate the fairness of the scenario they received. They will then complete
a political orientation attitudes scale similar to the one used in Nail et al. (2003).
Just as the results illustrate in the Nail et al. (2003) study, we predict liberals will attempt
to preserve their image of egalitarianism. We predict they will exhibit this by showing favorable
bias for a minority. Similarly, we predict conservatives will be more willing to reveal biases
against homosexuals when they are unaware of the intentions of the study. Our first hypothesis
(Hypothesis 1) predicts that individuals measuring liberal on the political orientation/attitudes
scale will report lower levels of support for the suspension of the homosexual student. Our
second hypothesis (Hypothesis 2) predicts that those measuring conservative on the political
orientation/attitudes scale will report lower levels of support for the suspension of the
heterosexual student.
Method
Participants
Seventy students from the University of Central Arkansas were recruited from general
psychology classes. This recruiting was done using a website given to the students by their
professors. The participants were given two of four enrichment credits required for their class in

6. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 6
exchange for their participation. To avoid coercion, all participants were given the option of an
alternate and brief writing assignment if they did not want to participate in the study. Since we
were assessing bias against homosexuals, any data from participants who identified as
homosexual were not used.
Procedure
First, the participants were given an informed consent cover letter to read and sign. The
participants were told that there was little or no risk to them if they participated, and the only
benefit they would receive was the enrichment credit for their course. The participants were then
given one of three scenarios. The scenarios were randomly assigned to participants by placing
them in three separate groups: control, homosexual suspended, and heterosexual suspended.
They were organized in repeating order and passed out by researchers facedown. Researchers did
not know which scenario each student received, and the participants presumably did not know
there was more than one scenario. The participants were asked to read the scenario they had been
given then answer a questionnaire using a five-point interval scale with items pertaining to what
they had read.
The control scenario was presented as follows:
This scenario is based on an event that occurred at a small, public university in
Ohio. Names have been withheld to protect the identities of the students involved. The
university is hoping to determine the best way to handle this type of situation in the
future.
Student A and Student B are roommates in an on-campus dormitory. After weeks
of conflict and tension, the situation escalates into a physical altercation. There were no
eyewitnesses to the conflict, and it could not be determined who initiated the fight. The

7. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 7
students went before the housing judiciary board, and the board’s verdict determined
through due process that Student A will be suspended from housing and will not be
allowed to live on campus for one academic year.
The other two scenarios differed from the control in only one aspect. Student A was
identified as being heterosexual and Student B was identified as being homosexual. One of these
scenarios stated the heterosexual student was suspended from housing, while the other stated the
homosexual student was suspended from housing.
The questionnaires that followed each scenario were identical. There were three questions
that read: “Did the housing judiciary board make a fair decision?”, “Would you have made a
similar decision if you were part of the housing judiciary board?”, and “Do you think the board’s
decision may have been influenced by personal prejudice?” The participants were asked to rate
the first question between 1 (Not Fair at All) and 5 (Very Fair). The second and third questions
were rated from 1(Definitely Not) to 5 (Absolutely).
After completion, the participants handed both the questionnaire and the scenario back to
the researcher. The participants were then given a one-item political orientation scale and an
updated version of the political attitudes scale used in Nail et al. (2003). The political orientation
item read, “Which of the following best describes your political orientation?” (1=Very Liberal,
2=Liberal, 3=Moderate, 4=Conservative, and 5=Very Conservative). Participants first circled
their political orientation and then answered the updated political items questionnaire. This
political attitudes scale was used to obtain information about each participant’s self-reported
political attitudes to determine if his or her self-reporting of political orientation was accurate.
There were ten items that followed the political orientation scale which measured
participants’ political attitudes. The same rating scale was used with options ranging from -5

8. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 8
(Very Unfavorable) on the left to +5 (Very favorable) on the right. The items were: The National
Organization for Women (NOW), Republicans, Gay marriage, Conservatives, Hillary Rodham
Clinton, The Affordable (Health) Care Act (ObamaCare), The National Rifle Association,
increasing military spending, Liberals, and The TEA Party (Taxed Enough Already). These
items were followed by some demographic questions about gender, age, ethnicity, and sexual
orientation.
The participants then handed in the political orientation/attitudes scale and demographic
information to the researcher and were debriefed before leaving. They were told about the true
purpose of the study (To explore how political orientation influences sexuality biases).
Participants were told about all three scenarios. They were asked if they had any questions and
were given the contact information of the researchers in case they had any questions or concerns
later that had not been answered during the session. If they had no questions or comments for the
researcher, they were permitted to leave and the experimental session was concluded.
Results
Our first task was to determine that our measurement scales had acceptable levels of
reliability; specifically, internal consistency. We rescaled the ten political attitudes items so that
negative scores (on the left) always indicated liberal views, whereas positive scores (on the right)
always indicated conservative views. Political attitudes yielded good internal consistency (α =
.81). We scaled the three items asking about the board’s decision to suspend the student so that
high numbers on the three-item post-scenario questionnaire would always indicate support for
the board. These three items also yielded reasonable internal consistency (α = .73).
Because both of these scales showed acceptable internal consistency, we averaged the
items for each scale separately to create average political attitudes and average support to

9. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 9
suspend the student for each participant. To prepare the data for analysis, we took a median split
of the mean political attitudes to create groups with relatively liberal versus conservative
attitudes. This procedure served as our operational definition of political orientation: liberal or
conservative. Mean political attitudes were strongly correlated with the participants’ self-
reported political orientation (r = .81, p < .0001). We used the median split of participants’
political attitudes as our measure of political orientation, however, because, unlike self-reported
political orientation, it provided for a nearly equal number of liberal and conservative
participants (33 and 37, respectively).
To test our hypotheses regarding bias as a function of political orientation and the
suspended student’s sexuality, we submitted participants’ mean support to suspend the student to
a 2 (political orientation of the subjects: liberal vs. conservative) X 3 (sexuality of the suspended
student: homosexual, heterosexual, or control) ANOVA. The analysis produced a significant
main effect for political orientation. Overall, liberal participants reported significantly greater
support to suspend the student (M = 2.37) than did conservatives (M = 1.95), F(1, 64) = 4.56, p <
.04, 2 = .07. This main effect, however, must be interpreted in light of a significant political
orientation of the subjects X the sexuality of the suspended student interaction, F(2, 64) = 3.16, p
< .05, 2 = .09 (see Figure 1).
To isolate the source of this interaction, we analyzed the orthogonal means in Figure 1
with tests for simple main effects. The only comparison that approached significance was that
between subjects in the liberal/heterosexual student suspended condition (M = 2.91) and subjects
in the conservative/heterosexual student suspended condition (M = 1.86), F(1, 64) = 7.78, p <
.01, 2 = .11.
Discussion

10. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 10
Originally, we believed our research would reveal sexuality biases specifically related to
political orientation/attitudes. Hypothesis 1 predicted liberals would show a bias in favor of a
homosexual individual. We based this off the societal stereotype that liberals are proponents for
equality (“Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs”, 2010). Past research shows that liberals want to
maintain an egalitarian image and may exaggerate their stance by showing favoritism toward
minority groups (Nail, Harton, & Decker, 2003). We thought this egalitarian tendency would
reveal itself by liberal participants indicating less support for the suspension of the homosexual
student than their non-liberal counterparts.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that conservatives would show bias against homosexuals.
Stereotypically, conservatives advocate tradition. Religion is usually the basis of their decision-
making, and most religions condemn homosexuality (“Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs”, 2010).
We predicted conservative participants would indicate less support for the suspension of the
heterosexual student than their non-conservative counterpart, thus revealing their more
traditional stance.
Our findings did not directly support either of our hypotheses, but we found significant
data, which we believe indirectly supports one of our hypotheses.
All of the participants’ ratings on the fairness of the scenarios were consistently below
the midpoint of the scale. The extreme nature of the scenarios proved to work as a confounding
variable. Participants focused more on the injustice as a whole rather than injustice inflicted on a
specific individual. This distraction could have prevented the participants from exhibiting biases
towards sexuality differences.
Future research could rephrase these scenarios to reduce the severity of the scenarios. If
the participants did not have such an evocative reaction, biases could potentially become more

11. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 11
pronounced. Sexual orientation would be more of a salient issue in their minds other than the
injustice the scenarios presented.
The results also showed that conservatives showed no apparent bias based on sexual
orientation in any scenario presented. We believe this consistency is caused by the age
demographic used in this study. Despite participants being conservative in value, they are still
young, college students. Their beliefs may be more progressive than that of older conservatives.
Most surprisingly, our data revealed liberals showing an apparent bias against a
heterosexual student, which we believe is indirect support for Hypothesis 1. Liberal participants
indicated a higher level of support for the suspension of the heterosexual student than in any
other presented scenario.
We believe this result has origins in prevailing societal assumptions. Many liberals keep
themselves up-to-date on conflicts within the homosexual community. Because these stories are
usually coming from the homosexual community, the stories are typically presented with bias in
favor of the community. We believe that some liberal individuals may assume that all conflicts
involving differences in sexuality must involve a heterosexual aggressor. Despite our
specification that no one knew who initiated the conflict, a liberal participant may use this
assumption when rating their support of the decision in the scenario.
The findings of this study could be very useful to those working in college housing
departments. This study can be applied to roommate selection processes with new, incoming
students. Incoming students could be given a survey asking about their political orientation and
sexual orientation. Housing could then make sure those with opposing views were not roomed
together. Our research could also help challenge the assumption that conservative, heterosexual
students would inherently be uncomfortable rooming with a homosexual student.

12. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 12
Despite these possible uses, our research could be improved upon. We were not working
with a random sample. Therefore, the results are not applicable to any real population. However,
our use of random assignment does mean results are generalizable to a large, theoretical
population.
As previously mentioned, our scenarios were too extreme to yield confident answers
from participants. With re-wording, the scenarios could yield more confident answers from
participants that show more apparent biases if they exist. Our research also only included self-
reported heterosexual students. Future studies could focus on the possibility of biases existing
between different sexualities. Our research seems to indicate a difference in values may exist
across age demographics. Future studies could include a range of ages to identify differences
between younger and older conservatives and/or liberals.
The current bipartisan system in the United States is one filled with animosity. Across
various news stations and newspapers, one can see liberal and conservative politicians pitted
against each other as bitter rivals. They are shown to millions as being absolutely unwilling to
compromise because of inherent differences. Our research shows that some long-standing
assumptions are not necessarily accurate. With more research on a national level, the idea that
liberals and conservatives cannot achieve sociable compromise could be challenged. If these
views are challenged, liberals and conservative might gain a better understanding for the other.
With that, news networks would have less time to report on venomous relations and more time to
report on the progress being made within the United States government.

13. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 13
References
17 states with legal gay marriage and 33 states with same sex marriage bans. (2014). Retrieved
February 5, 2014, from
http://gaymarriage.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004857
Bernat, J. A., Calhoun, K. S., Adams, H. E., & Zeichner, A. (2001). Homophobia and physical
aggression toward homosexual and heterosexual individuals. Journal Of Abnormal
Psychology, 110(1), 179-187. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.110.1.179
Conservative vs. liberal beliefs. (2010). Retrieved February 15, 2014, from
http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/
Frequently asked questions: defense of marriage act (DOMA). (2014). Retrieved February 5,
2014, from http://www.glaad.org/marriage/doma
Matthew’s story. (2014). Retrieved February 5, 2014, from http://www.matthewshepard.org/our-
story/matthews-story
Nail, P. R., Harton, H. C., & Decker, B. P. (2003). Political orientation and modern versus
aversive racism: Tests of Dovidio and Gaertner's (1998) integrated model. Journal Of
Personality And Social Psychology, 84(4), 754-770. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.754
Stotzer, R. (2007) Comparison of hate crime rates across protected and unprotected groups.
University of California School of Law: The Williams Institute. Retrieved April 21, 2014
from http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Stotzer-Comparison-Hate-
Crime-June-2007.pdf

14. BIAS AS A FUNCTION OF POLITICAL ORIENTATION 14
Sexual Orientation of the Suspended Student
Figure 1. Support to suspend student by condition and political orientation of student suspended.
No significant differences were found for conservative interactions with any orientation. Liberals
were more likely to support suspending heterosexuals than homosexuals or the control. Standard
errors are represented in the figure by the error bars attached to each column.
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Homosexual Heterosexual Control
SupporttoSuspendStudent
Liberal
Conservative