Many socially conservative settings oppose pro-LGBT+ advocacy because of its perceived threat to “traditional values.” Can messaging on these issues from sources considered to have similar values be more effective than messaging from sources considered to have different values? This research uses the move towards legal protection of certain LGBT+ rights in Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, and South Africa to understand whether signals of changing social norms from African sources are better able to shift perspectives of those elsewhere on the continent than primes from Western sources. Using a survey experiment conducted in Uganda, I show that neither one-off messaging from African sources nor one-off messaging from Western sources shifts beliefs or behavior on LGBT+ issues. Rather, these messages produce backlash to both African and Western sources. This work highlights the challenges of attempting to rapidly change perspectives on LGBT+ issues in the most socially conservative settings.
AbadieA.AtheyS.ImbensG.WooldridgeJ. (2017). When should you adjust standard errors for clustering? Technical report w24003. National Bureau of Economic Research.
2.
Abou-ChadiT.FinniganR. (2019). Rights for same-sex couples and public attitudes toward gays and lesbians in Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 52(6), 868–895. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018797947
3.
AbramsD.HoggM. A. (1988). Comments on the motivational status of self-esteem in social identity and intergroup discrimination. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(4), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420180403
4.
Alrababa’hA.WilliamsonS.DillonA.HainmuellerJ.HangartnerD.HotardM.LaitinD.LawrenceD.WeinsteinJ. (2022). Learning from null effects: A bottom-up approach. Political Analysis, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2021.51
5.
AnanyevM.PoykerM. (2021). Christian missions and anti-gay attitudes in Africa. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 184, 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.02.003
6.
AyoubP. M.GarretsonJ. (2017). Getting the message out: Media context and global changes in attitudes toward homosexuality. Comparative Political Studies, 50(8), 1055–1085. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016666836
7.
AyoubP. M.PageD.WhittS. (2021). Pride amid prejudice: The influence of LGBT+ rights activism in a socially conservative society. American Political Science Review, 115(2), 467–485. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055420001082
8.
AyoubP. M. (2014). With arms wide shut: Threat perception, norm reception, and mobilized resistance to LGBT rights. Journal of Human Rights, 13(3), 337–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2014.919213
9.
BernheimB. D. (1994). A theory of conformity. Journal of Political Economy, 102(5), 841–877. https://doi.org/10.1086/261957
10.
BicchieriC. (2016). Norms in the wild: How to diagnose, measure, and change social norms. Oxford University Press.
BolsenT.LeeperT. J.ShapiroM. A. (2014). Doing what others do: Norms, science, and collective action on global warming. Archives of Pharmacal Research, 42(1), 65–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x13484173
13.
BompaniB.ValoisC. (2017). Sexualizing politics: The anti-homosexuality bill, party-politics and the new political dispensation in Uganda. Critical African Studies, 9(1), 52–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2015.1137479
14.
BonikowskiB. (2010). Cross-national interaction and cultural similarity: A relational analysis. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 51(5), 315–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715210376854
15.
BoydL. (2013). The problem with freedom: Homosexuality and human rights in Uganda. Anthropological Quarterly, 86(3), 697–724. https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.2013.0034
16.
BursztynL.GonzálezA. L.Yanagizawa-DrottD. (2020). Misperceived social norms: Women working outside the home in Saudi Arabia. American Economic Review, 110(10), 2997–3029. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20180975
17.
CarrollA.MendosL. (2017). State sponsored homophobia 2017: A world survey of sexual orientation laws: Criminalisation, protection and recognition. International lesbian, gay, bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association.
18.
CentolaD.BeckerJ.BrackbillD.BaronchelliA. (2018). Experimental evidence for tipping points in social convention. Science, 360(6393), 1116–1119. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aas8827
19.
ChitandoE.MatevekeP. (2017). Africanizing the discourse on homosexuality: Challenges and prospects. Critical African Studies, 9(1), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2017.1285243
20.
CorstangeD. (2009). Sensitive questions, truthful answers? Modeling the list experiment with LISTIT. Political Analysis, 17(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpn013
21.
DreierS. K.LongJ. D.WinklerS. J. (2020). African, religious, and tolerant? How religious diversity shapes attitudes toward sexual minorities in Africa. Politics and Religion, 13(2), 273–303. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755048319000348
22.
DreierS. K. (2018). Resisting rights to renounce imperialism: East African churches’ strategic symbolic resistance to LGBTQ inclusion. International Studies Quarterly, 62(2), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqy012
23.
DroitcourJ.CasparR. A.HubbardM. L.ParsleyT. L.VisscherW.EzzatiT. M. (1991). The item count technique as a method of indirect questioning: A review of its development and a case study application. In BiemerP. P.GrovesR. M.LybergL. E.MathiowetzN. A.SudmanS. (Eds), Measurement errors in surveys (pp. 185–210). Wiley-Interscience. chapter 11.
24.
DulaniB.SamboG.DionneK. Y. (2016). Good neighbours? African express high levels of tolerance for many but not for all. Afrobarometer.
25.
EnosR. D.GidronN. (2018). Exclusion and cooperation in diverse societies: Experimental evidence from Israel. American Political Science Review, 112(4), 742–757. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055418000266
26.
GerberA. S.RogersT. (2009). Descriptive social norms and motivation to vote: Everybody’s voting and so should you. The Journal of Politics, 71(1), 178–191. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381608090117
27.
GerschewskiJ. (2021). Explanations of institutional change: Reflecting on a “missing diagonal”. American Political Science Review, 115(1), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055420000751
28.
GlynnA. N. (2013). What can we learn with statistical truth serum?Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(S1), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs070
29.
GómezÁ.TroppL. R.VázquezA.VociA.HewstoneM. (2018). Depersonalized extended contact and injunctive norms about cross-group friendship impact intergroup orientations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 356–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.010
30.
GreenD.GerberA. (2012). Field experiments. W.W. Norton & Company.
31.
GreifA. (1994). Cultural beliefs and the organization of society: A historical and theoretical reflection on collectivist and individualist societies. Journal of Political Economy, 102(5), 912–950. https://doi.org/10.1086/261959
32.
GrossmanG. (2015). Renewalist christianity and the political saliency of LGBTs: Theory and evidence from sub-saharan Africa. The Journal of Politics, 77(2), 337–351. https://doi.org/10.1086/679596
33.
HarrisonB. F.MichelsonM. R. (2017). Listen, we need to talk: How to change attitudes about LGBT rights. Oxford University Press.
34.
InglehartR. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton University Press.
35.
JjuukoA. (2013). The incremental approach: Uganda’s struggle for the decriminalisation of homosexuality. In LennoxC.WaitesM. (Eds.), Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity in the the commonwealth: Struggles for decriminalisation and change (pp. 381–408). University of London Press. chapter 14.
36.
Kenya High Court (2019). Petition No. 150 & 234 of 2016.
37.
KramonE.WeghorstK. (2019). (Mis) measuring sensitive attitudes with the list experiment: Solutions to list experiment breakdown in Kenya. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(S1), 236–263. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz009
38.
LaxJ. R.PhillipsJ. H. (2009). Gay rights in the states: Public opinion and policy responsiveness. American Political Science Review, 103(3), 367–386. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055409990050
39.
LaxJ. R.PhillipsJ. H.StollwerkA. F. (2016). Are survey respondents lying about their support for same-sex marriage? Lessons from a list experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(2), 510–533. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfv056
40.
LennoxC.WaitesM. (2013). Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity in the commonwealth: From history and law to developing activism and transnational dialogues. In LennoxC.WaitesM. (Eds.), Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity in the commonwealth: Struggles for decriminalisation and change (pp. 1–60). University of London Press. chapter 1.
LyonN. (2022). Replication data for: Value similarity and norm change: Null effects and backlash to messaging on same-sex rights in Uganda. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/H1RSFY
43.
MackieG. (1996). Ending footbinding and infibulation: A convention account. American Sociological Review, 61(6), 999. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096305
44.
McClendonG. H. (2014). Social esteem and participation in contentious politics: A field experiment at an LGBT Pride rally. American Journal of Political Science, 58(2), 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12076
45.
McEneaneyE. H.RamirezF. O. (1997). From women’s suffrage to reproduction rights? Cross-national considerations. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 38(1–2), 6–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/002071529703800102
46.
Nuñez-MietzF. G.García IommiL. (2017). Can transnational norm advocacy undermine internalization? Explaining immunization against LGBT rights in Uganda. International Studies Quarterly, 61(1), 196–209. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqx011
NyanziS. (2013). Dismantling reified African culture through localised homosexualities in Uganda. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 15(8), 952–967. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2013.798684
49.
OfosuE. K.ChambersM. K.ChenJ. M.HehmanE. (2019). Same-sex marriage legalization associated with reduced implicit and explicit antigay bias. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(18), 8846–8851. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806000116
PuarJ. K. (2018). Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Duke University Press.
52.
RamirezF. O.SoysalY.ShanahanS. (1997). The changing logic of political citizenship: Cross-national acquisition of women’s suffrage rights, 1890 to 1990 (pp. 735–745). American Sociological Review.
53.
RaoR. (2020). Out of time: The queer politics of postcoloniality. Oxford University Press.
54.
ScaccoA.WarrenS. S. (2018). Can social contact reduce prejudice and discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in Nigeria. American Political Science Review, 112(3), 654–677. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055418000151
55.
SechristG. B.Milford-SzafranL. R. (2011). I depend on you, you depend on me. Shouldn’t we agree?”: The influence of interdependent relationships on individuals’ racial attitudes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33(2), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2011.568877
56.
StangorC.SechristG. B.JostJ. T. (2001). Changing racial beliefs by providing consensus information. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(4), 486–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201274009
57.
StarrH. (1991). Democratic dominoes: Diffusion approaches to the spread of democracy in the international system. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35(2), 356–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002791035002010
58.
StetsJ. E.BurkeP. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695870
59.
StrangD.MeyerJ. W. (1993). Institutional conditions for diffusion (pp. 487–511). Theory and Society.
60.
TabelliniG. (2008). Presidential address: Institutions and culture. Journal of the European Economic Association, 6(2–3), 255–294. https://doi.org/10.1162/jeea.2008.6.2-3.255
ZallerJ.FeldmanS. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 36(3), 579–616. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111583
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
