Although support for same-sex marriage has grown dramatically over the past decade, public opinion remains markedly divided. Here, we propose that the political divide over same-sex marriage represents a deeper divide between conflicting mating strategies. Specifically, we propose that opposition to same-sex marriage can be explained in terms of (a) individual differences in short-term mating orientation and (b) mental associations between homosexuality and sexual promiscuity. We created a novel Implicit Association Test to measure mental associations between homosexuality and promiscuity. We found that mental associations between homosexuality and promiscuity, at both the implicit and the explicit levels, interacted with short-term mating orientation to predict opposition to same-sex marriage. Our model accounted for 42.3% of the variation in attitudes toward same-sex marriage, and all predictors remained robust when we controlled for potential confounds. Our results reveal the centrality of mating psychology in attitudes toward same-sex marriage.
AarøeL.PetersenM. B. (2013). Hunger games: Fluctuations in blood glucose levels influence support for social welfare. Psychological Science, 24, 2550–2556.
2.
BrodyS.RauH.FührerN.HillebrandH.RüdigerD.BraunM. (1996). Traditional ideology as an inhibitor of sexual behavior. The Journal of Psychology, 130, 615–626.
3.
BrumbaughS. M.SanchezL. A.NockS. L.WrightJ. D. (2008). Attitudes toward gay marriage in states undergoing marriage law transformation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 345–359.
4.
BudigM. J. (2003). Are women’s employment and fertility histories interdependent? An examination of causal order using event history analysis. Social Science Research, 32, 376–401.
5.
CahnN.CarboneJ. (2010). Red families v. blue families: Legal polarization and the creation of culture. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
6.
CapsutoS. (2000). Alternate channels: The uncensored story of gay and lesbian images on radio and television. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.
9.
GeigerW.HarwoodJ.HummertM. L. (2006). College students’ multiple stereotypes of lesbians: A cognitive perspective. Journal of Homosexuality, 51, 165–182.
10.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
11.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.
12.
HaidtJ.McCauleyC.RozinP. (1994). Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: A scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 701–713.
13.
HaldG. M. (2006). Gender differences in pornography consumption among young heterosexual Danish adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 577–585.
14.
InbarY.PizarroD. A.BloomP. (2009). Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals. Cognition & Emotion, 23, 714–725.
JacksonJ. J.KirkpatrickL. A. (2007). The structure and measurement of human mating strategies: Toward a multidimensional model of sociosexuality. Evolution & Human Behavior, 28, 382–391.
17.
KurzbanR.DukesA.WeedenJ. (2010). Sex, drugs and moral goals: Mating strategies and views about recreational drugs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277, 3501–3508.
18.
LammersJ.StokerJ. I.JordanJ.PollmannM.StapelD. A. (2011). Power increases infidelity among men and women. Psychological Science, 22, 1191–1197.
19.
LiY. J.CohenA. B.WeedenJ.KenrickD. T. (2010). Mating competitors increase religious beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 428–431.
QuintelierK. J.IshiiK.WeedenJ.KurzbanR.BraeckmanJ. (2013). Individual differences in mating strategy are related to views about recreational drug use in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Japan. Human Nature, 24, 196–217.
26.
RossJ. (2002). Sex, marriage and history: Analyzing the continued resistance to same-sex marriage. Southern Methodist University Law Review, 55, 1657–1681.
27.
RowattW. C.SchmittD. P. (2003). Associations between religious orientation and varieties of sexual experience. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42, 455–465.
28.
SmithD. M.LoewensteinG.RozinP.SherriffR. L.UbelP. A. (2007). Sensitivity to disgust, stigma, and adjustment to life with a colostomy. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 787–803.
TaniguchiH. (1999). The timing of childbearing and women’s wages. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 1008–1019.
31.
TerrizziJ. A.ShookN. J.VentisW. L. (2010). Disgust: A predictor of social conservatism and prejudicial attitudes toward homosexuals. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 587–592.
32.
WeedenJ. (2003). Genetic interests, life histories, and attitudes towards abortion (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
33.
WeedenJ.CohenA. B.KenrickD. T. (2008). Religious attendance as reproductive support. Evolution & Human Behavior, 29, 327–334.
34.
WeedenJ.KurzbanR. (2014). The hidden agenda of the political mind: How self-interest shapes our opinions and why we won’t admit it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
WhiteA. E.KenrickD. T.NeelR.NeubergS. L. (2013). From the bedroom to the budget deficit: Mate competition changes men’s attitudes toward economic redistribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 924–940.
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.
