Identifying psychological responses of stigmatized groups to referendums
- PMID: 29581304
- PMCID: PMC5899433
- DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1712897115
Identifying psychological responses of stigmatized groups to referendums
Abstract
Public votes and referendums on the rights of marginalized communities are utilized in 27 states and occur with some regularity. However, research has only recently begun to examine the psychological consequences of these voter referendums for members of stigmatized groups, and a number of important questions remain regarding the internal validity and generalizability of the existing evidence. The current study advances this literature by combining survey data from a large probability-based sample conducted in 2012 [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender (LGBT) n = 939; non-LGBT n = 31,067] with media market ad-buy data in states where marriage equality was on the ballot. Television media markets cross state boundaries, ensuring that there was an unintended group of people in 12 states who were exposed to the same-sex marriage discourse but who did not live in states with the voter referendum ("media market spillovers"). We take advantage of this unique data structure by comparing LGBT people in the media market spillovers to those residing in the same state but in nonspillover markets with no ad exposure. LGBT people are emotionally affected by these campaigns, and non-LGBT people are unaffected. LGBT people in markets with a cumulative total of 400 ads have a 34.0% greater probability of reporting stress than LGBT people not exposed to ads. Additionally, while the negative ads evoked sadness, positive ads evoked enjoyment and happiness. Thus, public votes on minority rights represent both a source of minority stress and resilience.
Keywords: LGBT; minority stress; resilience; structural stigma; voter referendums.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures



References
-
- HoSang DM . Racial Propositions: Ballot Initiatives and the Making of Postwar California. Univ California Press; Berkeley, CA: 2010.
-
- Carter ME. Regulating abortion through direct democracy: The liberty of all versus the moral code of a majority. Boston Univ Law Rev. 2011;91:305–346.
-
- Lewis DC. Direct democracy and minority rights: Same-sex marriage bans in the U.S. Soc Sci Q. 2011;92:364–383. - PubMed
-
- Stone SL. Gay Rights at the Ballot Box. Univ Minnesota Press; Minneapolis: 2012.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources