Facebook LGBTQ Pictivism: The Effects of Women’s Rainbow Profile Filters on Sexual Prejudice and Online Belonging

Abstract

Facebook’s rainbow profile filter represents a popular display of activism (“pictivism”) commonly used by women, yet little is known of pictivism’s potential for creating social change. We tested whether women’s group status (belonging to a dominant vs. marginalized group) and filter use influenced viewers’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. We conducted a series of 2 (target sexual orientation: queer or heterosexual) × 2 (filter use: filter or no filter) experiments with heterosexual (N ₁ = 198, N ₂ = 186) and LGBTQ (N ₃ = 290) participants. Participants rated women who used rainbow filters as more activist than women who did not engage in pictivism. Although neither target sexual orientation nor filter use influenced participants’ ally behavior (donations), heterosexual people who viewed a woman using a filter reported greater closeness to LGBTQ people and greater intentions of supporting LGBTQ people when the woman was queer than heterosexual. Exposure to rainbow filters caused LGBTQ participants to express greater online and societal belonging than when filters were absent. Taken together, women’s pictivism and the online visibility of queer women yielded some psychological benefits for heterosexual and LGBTQ viewers. If the goal of pictivism is to enhance marginalized groups’ feelings of support, it works as intended. We thus recommend that both heterosexual and LGBTQ people who care about LGBTQ rights and seek to affirm LGBTQ individuals’ sense of belonging embrace opportunities on social media, specifically through profile picture filters, to communicate their support. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684320930566

Keywords

activism allyship social media sexual prejudice belonging slacktivism

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allport

G. W.

(1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.

Aron

E. N.

Smollan

(1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596–612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596

Ayoub

P. M.

(2018). How the media has helped change public views about lesbian and gay people. https://scholars.org/brief/how-media-has-helped-change-public-views-about-lesbian-and-gay-people

Bartoş

S. E.

Berger

Hegarty

(2014). Interventions to reduce sexual prejudice: A study-space analysis and meta-analytic review. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(4), 363–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2013.871625

Berscheid

Snyder

Omoto

A. M.

(1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 792–807. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792

Bollen

K. A.

Hoyle

R. H.

(1990). Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 69(2), 479–504. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/69.2.479

Boulianne

(2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542

Brown

M. J.

Henriquez

(2011). Support for gay and lesbian civil rights: Development and examination of a new scale. Journal of Homosexuality, 58(4), 462–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2011.555664

Chapman

Coffé

(2015). Changing Facebook profile pictures as part of a campaign: Who does it and why? Journal of Youth Studies, 19(4), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2015.1083962

10.

Cheng

S. K.

L. C.

Traylor

A. M.

King

E. B.

(2019). Helping or hurting? Understanding women’s perceptions of male allies. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 5(2), 44–54. https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/pad/vol5/iss2/6

11.

Chin

W. W.

Salisbury

W. D.

Pearson

A. W.

Stollak

M. J.

(1999). Perceived cohesion in small groups: Adapting and testing the perceived cohesion scale in a small-group setting. Small Group Research, 30(6), 751–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649649903000605

12.

Cihangir

Barreto

Ellemers

(2014). Men as allies against sexism: The positive effects of a suggestion of sexism by male (vs. female) sources. Sage Open, 4(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014539168

13.

Cornelissen

Karelaia

Soyer

(2013). Clicktivism or slacktivism? Impression management and moral licensing. In Cornelissen

Reutskaja

Valenzuela

(Eds.), European advances in consumer research (Vol. 10, p. 244). Association for Consumer Research.

14.

Czopp

A. M.

Monteith

M. J.

(2003). Confronting prejudice (literally): Reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(4), 532–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202250923

15.

Czopp

A. M.

Monteith

M. J.

Mark

A. Y.

(2006). Standing up for a change: Reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 784–803. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.784

16.

Dewey

(2015). More than 26 million people have changed their Facebook picture to a rainbow flag. Here’s why that matters. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/06/29/more-than-26-million-people-have-changed-their-facebook-picture-to-a-rainbow-flag-heres-why-that-matters/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.79e2f98b87ef

17.

Dillard

J. P.

Shen

(2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500111815

18.

Drury

B. J.

Kaiser

C. R.

(2014). Allies against sexism: The role of men in confronting sexism. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), 637–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12083

19.

Duhigg

J. M.

Rostosky

S. S.

Gray

B. E.

Wimsatt

M. K.

(2010). Development of heterosexuals in sexual-minority allies: A qualitative exploration. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 7, 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-010-0005-2

20.

Duncan

L. E.

(2018). The psychology of collective action. In Deaux

Snyder

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (2nd ed., pp. 885–908). Oxford University Press.

21.

Eagly

A. H.

Wood

Chaiken

(1978). Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(4), 424–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.424

22.

Edwards

S. M.

Lee

J. H.

(2002). Forced exposure and psychological reactance: Antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673678

23.

Ellis

S. J.

Kitzinger

Wilkinson

(2002). Attitudes towards lesbians and gay men and support for lesbian and gay human rights among psychology students. Journal of Homosexuality, 44(1), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v44n01_07

24.

Everitt

J. M.

Camp

(2009). Changing the game changes the frame: The media’s use of lesbian stereotypes in leadership versus election campaigns. Canadian Political Science Review, 3(3), 24–39.

25.

Faul

Erdfelder

Buchner

Lang

A. G.

(2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

26.

Fingerhut

A. W.

(2011). Straight allies: What predicts heterosexuals’ alliance with the LGBT community? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(9), 2230–2248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00807.x

27.

Fox

Ralston

(2016). Queer identity online: Informal learning and teaching experiences of LGBTQ individuals on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 635–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.009

28.

Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. (2019). Accelerating acceptance report of 2019. https://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/Accelerating%20Acceptance%202019.pdf

29.

Gervais

S. J.

Hillard

A. L.

(2014). Confronting sexism as persuasion: Effects of a confrontation’s recipient, source, message, and context. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), 653–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12084

30.

Goodman

J. K.

Cryder

C. E.

Cheema

(2013). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(3), 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1753

31.

Grandpre

Alvaro

E. M.

Burgoon

Miller

C. H.

Hall

J. R.

(2003). Adolescent reactance and anti-smoking campaigns: A theoretical approach. Health Communication, 15(3), 349–366. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327027HC1503_6

32.

Gulker

J. E.

Mark

A. Y.

Monteith

M. J.

(2013). Confronting prejudice: The who, what, and why of confrontation effectiveness. Social Influence, 8(4), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2012.736879

33.

Halupka

(2014). Clicktivism: A systematic heuristic. Policy and Internet, 6(2), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/1944-2866.POI355

34.

Hausmann

L. R.

Schofield

J. W.

Woods

R. L.

(2007). Sense of belonging as a predictor of intentions to persist among African American and White first-year college students. Research in Higher Education, 48(7), 803–839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-007-9052-9

35.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford.

36.

Henry

(2016). Safety pins: The bat signal of White guilt for Donald Trump’s America. https://www.mic.com/articles/159365/safety-pins-the-batsignal-of-white-guilt-in-donald-trump-s-america

37.

Herek

G. M.

(1984). Beyond” homophobia”: A social psychological perspective on attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 10(1–2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v10n01_01

38.

Herek

G. M.

McLemore

K. A.

(2013). Sexual prejudice. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143826

39.

Hitlin

Mitchell

Jurkowitz

(2013). News coverage conveys strong momentum for same-sex marriage. https://www.journalism.org/2013/06/17/news-coverage-conveys-strong-momentum/

40.

Hopp

(2015). The effect of numeracy on the relationship between state reactance and message evaluations. Communication Research Reports, 32(4), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2015.1089855

41.

Jones

K. N.

Brewster

M. E.

(2017). From awareness to action: Examining predictors of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) activism for heterosexual people. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 87(6), 680–689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ort0000219

42.

Kaiser

C. R.

Miller

C. T.

(2001). Stop complaining! The social costs of making attributions to discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 254–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201272010.

43.

Koch

Zerback

(2013). Helpful or harmful? How frequent repetition affects perceived statement credibility. Journal of Communication, 63(6), 993–1010. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12063

44.

Kroeper

K. M.

Sanchez

D. T.

Himmelstein

M. S.

(2014). Heterosexual men’s confrontation of sexual prejudice: The role of precarious manhood. Sex Roles, 70(1–2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0306-z

45.

Lane

D. S.

Dal Cin

(2018). Sharing beyond slacktivism: The effect of socially observable prosocial media sharing on subsequent offline helping behavior. Information, Communication, & Society, 21(11), 1523–1540. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1340496

46.

LaPointe

Reisetter

(2008). Belonging online: Students’ perceptions of the value and efficacy of an online learning community. International Journal on E-Learning, 7(4), 641–665.

47.

Major

O’Brien

L. T.

(2005). The social psychology of stigma. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 393–421. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137

48.

Mohr

J. J.

Rochlen

A. B.

(1999). Measuring attitudes regarding bisexuality in lesbian, gay male, and heterosexual populations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46(3), 353–369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.46.3.353

49.

Moody

White

D. R.

(2003). Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups. American Sociological Review, 68(1), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088904

50.

Morozov

(2009). From slacktivism to activism. https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/09/05/from-slacktivism-to-activism/

51.

Morrison

T. G.

Kenny

Harrington

(2005). Modern prejudice toward gay men and lesbian women: Assessing the viability of a measure of modern homonegative attitudes within an Irish context. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131(3), 219–250. https://doi.org/10.3200/MONO.131.3.219-250

52.

Oeldorf-Hirsch

McGloin

(2017). Identifying the predictors of participation in Facebook Pictivism Campaigns. Social Media + Society, 3(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117727637

53.

H. J.

Ozkaya

Larose

(2014). How does online social networking enhance life satisfaction? The relationships among online supportive interaction, affect, perceived social support, sense of community, and life satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.053

54.

Penney

(2015). Social media and symbolic action: Exploring participation in the Facebook red equal sign profile picture campaign. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(1), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12092

55.

Pettigrew

T. F.

Tropp

L. R.

(2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751

56.

Petty

R. E.

Fleming

M. A.

Priester

J. R.

Feinstein

A. H.

(2001). Individual versus group interest violation: Surprise as a determinant of argument scrutiny and persuasion. Social Cognition, 19(4), 418–442. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.19.4.418.20758

57.

Pew Research Center. (2017). Homosexuality, gender and religion. https://www.people-press.org/2017/10/05/5-homosexuality-gender-and-religion/

58.

Pew Research Center. (2018). Activism in the social media age. https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/07/11/public-attitudes-toward-political-engagement-on-social-media/

59.

Rains

S. A.

Turner

M. M.

(2007). Psychological reactance and persuasive health communication: A test and extension of the intertwined model. Human Communication Research, 33(2), 241–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00298.x

60.

Rasinski

H. M.

Czopp

A. M.

(2010). The effect of target status on witnesses’ reactions to confrontations of bias. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530903539754

61.

Reimer

N. K.

Becker

J. C.

Benz

Christ

Dhont

Klocke

Neji

Rychlowska

Schmid

Hewstone

(2017). Intergroup contact and social change: Implications of negative and positive contact for collective action in advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(1), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216676478

62.

Schiappa

Gregg

P. B.

Hewes

D. E.

(2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Monographs, 72(1), 92–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/0363775052000342544

63.

Schultz

J. R.

Maddox

K. B.

(2013). Shooting the messenger to spite the message? Exploring reactions to claims of racial bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(3), 346–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212475223

64.

Sehl

(2018). All the Facebook demographics that matter to social media marketers. https://blog.hootsuite.com/facebook-demographics/

65.

Shulman

(2009). The case against mass e-mails: Perverse incentives and low quality public participation in U.S. federal rulemaking. Policy & Internet, 1(1), 23–53. https://doi.org/10.2202/1944-2866.1010

66.

State

Adamic

L. A.

(2015, March). The diffusion of support in an online social movement: Evidence from the adoption of equal-sign profile pictures. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 1741–1750). Vancouver, BC, Canada. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675290

67.

Swim

J. K.

Ferguson

M. J.

Hyers

L. L.

(1999). Avoiding stigma by association: Subtle prejudice against lesbians in the form of social distancing. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(1), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2101_6

68.

Tankard

M. E.

Paluck

E. L.

(2017). The effect of a Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage on social norms and personal attitudes. Psychological Science, 28(9), 1334–1344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617709594

69.

Valenzuela

(2013). Unpacking the use of social media for protest behavior: The roles of information, opinion expression, and activism. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 920–942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479375

70.

Van Zomeren

Postmes

Spears

(2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504

71.

Washington

Evans

N. J.

(1991). Becoming an ally. In Evans

N. J.

Walls

V. A.

(Eds.), Beyond tolerance: Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals on campus (pp. 195–204). American Association for Counseling and Development.

72.

White

F. A.

Verrelli

Maunder

R. D.

Kervinen

(2019). Using electronic contact to reduce homonegative attitudes, emotions, and behavioral intentions among heterosexual women and men: A contemporary extension of the contact hypothesis. The Journal of Sex Research, 56(9), 1179–1191. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1491943

73.

Worthington

R. L.

Dillon

F. R.

Becker-Schutte

A. M.

(2005). Development, reliability, and validity of the Lesbian, gay, and bisexual knowledge and attitudes scale for heterosexuals (LGB-KASH). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(1), 104–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.1.104

74.

Ybarra

M. L.

Mitchell

K. J.

Palmer

N. A.

Reisner

S. L.

(2015). Online social support as a buffer against online and offline peer and sexual victimization among US LGBT and non-LGBT youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 39, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.08.006

75.

Zavala-Rojas

(2014). Thermometer scale (feeling thermometer). In Michalos

A. C.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 6633–6634). Springer.

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.

0.00 MB

0.79 MB