This study falls under a bigger bit of browse into the category relations and you may associated thinking for the some other personal organizations. The participants had been checked-out after offering its consent in writing. Respondents had been assured privacy to complete a couple of paper-and-pencil surveys on ATLG methods really. Volunteers received even more credit situations because of their movement amounts. The latest ethical criteria of your Chilean Search Commission (CONICYT) was implemented.
Additionally, governmental mind-categorization (inquiring on the governmental tastes coded on the three groups: leftover, cardio and you can proper) and you will intimate direction was indeed integrated
Members answered market concerns to evaluate ATLG validity: gender, ages, socioeconomic condition (higher, center and you may low levels were utilized), and you can religion character because of mind-revealing towards the means to fix practical question “You think your self a spiritual person?” In addition, a beneficial 4-item size scale into the an effective 6-section Likert size about your advantages participants give its spiritual information within their every day life was applied.
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).
Higher obsЕ‚uga daddyhunt (close to 6) score shown deeper prejudice, and you will low scores said beneficial attitudes toward homosexuals
A portion of the mission were to determine the root ATLG basis build. So, about three basis patterns were projected: a one-grounds design (ATLG contains an individual homophobia cause of and this all activities saturate); a-two-basis correlated design (two size made up from the ATL and ATG subscales whose products is to saturate from the corresponding grounds is suggested) another purchase model which have two synchronised things (in which ATG subscale factors carry out saturate in two proportions – homosexual Philosophy and you will Nature – and people of your ATL measure manage saturate from the almost every other three – lesbian Conventional Opinions, and you will Public Approve and you can Public Liberties). This type of five dimensions had been obtained from analyses done in past degree (Cardenas Barrientos, 2008).
Typically, the complement is perfect when design affairs is actually enhanced. Hence, the 2-grounds second-order model is among the most parsimonious for all indexes gotten. CFI (Comparative Boost Directory) and you may NFI (Regular Complement Directory) spiders inform you thinking over 0.nine, all of them considered to be pretty good (Bentler Dudgeon, 1996). RFI (Cousin Boost Directory) really worth tips 0.9, especially in the five-basis design. In addition, RMSEA (Resources Mean square Error off Approximation) directory are high that have beliefs lower than 0.08 (Browne Kudeck, 1993), ergo confirming the best match of one’s four-basis model.
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).