Dimensions of Individuals' Judgements About Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology Psychology, Department of 6-2012 Dimensions of Individuals' Judgements about Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation Luis F. Morales Knight University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons, and the Psychiatry and Psychology Commons Morales Knight, Luis F., "Dimensions of Individuals' Judgements about Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation" (2012). Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology. 43. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss/43 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. DIMENSIONS OF INDIVIDUALS’ JUDGEMENTS ABOUT SEXUAL ATTRACTION, ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT, AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION by Luis F. Morales Knight A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Psychology Under the Supervision of Professor Debra A. Hope Lincoln, Nebraska June, 2012 DIMENSIONS OF INDIVIDUALS’ JUDGEMENTS ABOUT SEXUAL ATTRACTION, ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT, AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION Luis F. Morales Knight, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2012 Advisor: Debra A. Hope Despite 150 years of scientific interest in sexual orientation, contemporary investigators grapple with a number of serious difficulties. A precise, unified definition of sexual orientation appropriate for scientific use continues to elude researchers, most likely because there is still no single coherent theory of sexual orientation. This lack impedes research into the measurement of sexual orientation. Existing measurements of sexual orientation rely on partial or incompletely empirical research. The present study identified promising avenues for development of credible definitions, theories, and measurements of sexual orientation: (a) mate-selection tasks; (b) the idea that bisexually- identified individuals place a lower priority on partner gender in mate-selection decisions; (c) using “gender diagnosticity”—i.e., measures that differentiate between men and women, using an empirical criterion—to investigate the connections between gender- role orientation, sexual orientation, and mate selection; (d) distinguishing between sexual desire and pair bonding; (e) a cross-category theory of sexual orientation identity. The present study was conducted via an Internet survey. Participants were 726 participants with varying gender and sexual orientation identities. A large number of participants espoused nontraditional gender and sexual orientation identities. Results indicated strong support for distinguishing between sexual desire and pair bonding, in that different decision rules for mate selection obtained in each, and for understanding bisexuality as involving lower prioritization of partner gender. The utility of mate- selection tasks was also supported. The use of gender diagnosticity was partly supported, in that a relationship between adult gender typicality and sexual orientation was found, but further investigation is needed to determine appropriate measures as vehicles for this approach. Conceptualizations of sexual orientation were observed to vary with gender and sexual orientation identity categories, though there was also substantial agreement across categories. The cross-category theory of sexual orientation was partially supported in that heterosexually-identified participants who endorsed some same-sex sexuality appeared to be actively exploring their sexual orientation identity. The results highlighted the fractal and dynamic complexity and interrelationship of gender and sexual orientation, and the need to understand nontraditional gender and sexual orientation identities. iv DEDICATION To Margaret Naomi, Victoria Sophia, Hazel Naomi, Janet Diane, and Margaret Alice: sine quibus, non. v AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I have been extraordinarily privileged to have the care, support, and mentorship of Debra Hope over the past six years, from that first telephone conversation in January 2006, through a surprising number of twists and turns, heartbreaks and joys, to the present moment. She answered a thousand emails; read a hundred drafts; taught me what is, and what is not, CBT; rocked my babies to sleep in her arms during lab meetings; and, more than anyone else, made me a psychologist. Nor would my success have been possible without David Hansen, department chair, teacher, and human being extraordinaire; David DiLillo, tireless DCT and kind soul; Dan Ullman, fellow dad and constant champion; Calvin Garbin, world’s greatest statistics professor and source of much of my current teaching style; Will Spaulding, great mind and dear sarcast; and all the fine people and generous, supportive culture of the UNL Psychology Department. This dissertation caps off an instance of that very odd phenomenon: the training of a clinical psychologist. We serve many masters, aiming to become researchers, teachers, and clinicians—among other things—in just a few short years (however long they may have seemed at the time!). I owe an unrepayable debt to my mentors not already mentioned: Keith Allen, Lorena Bradley, Myla Browne, Mark DeKraai, Joe Evans, Mary Fran Flood, Tom Guck, Mark Lukin, Jim Madison, Dennis McChargue, Jennifer Perry, Jocelyn Ritchie, Mario Scalora, Bill Shuart, and Bill Warzak. Finally, my sincere thanks to my patient, thoughtful, and critical committee members, David Hansen, Kristen Olson, and Sarah Gervais. You brought order to this raucous, tumbling mess of a dissertation, and I thank you for it. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii DEDICATION ................................................................................................................... iv AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................... v TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... vi LISTS OF MULTIMEDIA OBJECTS ............................................................................... x Dimensions of Individuals’ Judgements about Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation ................................................................................................ 15 Definitions of Sexual Orientation are Inconsistent .................................................. 18 Theories of Sexual Orientation are Flawed ............................................................. 21 Evolutionary theories ...................................................................................... 21 Biological theories .......................................................................................... 23 Learning/environmental theories .................................................................... 31 Social-constructionist theories ........................................................................ 33 Measurements of Sexual Orientation are Without Theory or Evidence .................. 34 Many researchers do not measure sexual orientation at all ............................ 34 Many researchers rely on self-reported sexual orientation identity as a proxy for sexual orientation ................................................................................ 36 A note on direct measurement of sexual arousal and/or its correlates ............ 36 Review of measurements of sexual orientation .............................................. 38 Avenues for Improvement of Definitions, Theories, and Measurements of Sexual Orientation ......................................................................................................... 46 vii Mate selection studies suggest profitable methodologies for understanding same-sex relationships .............................................................................. 46 Bisexuality may be partially explained as lower prioritization of partner gender in mate selection decisions ............................................................ 49 Gender diagnosticity shows promise for connecting gender role orientation, sexual orientation, and mate selection ...................................................... 50 Exploring lay participants’ understanding of hypothesized components of sexual orientation may help establish their construct validity .................. 54 Diamond’s biobehavioral model ..................................................................... 56 A cross-category sexual identity development theory can help explain variations in heterosexual identity ............................................................ 58 Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 59 Research Hypotheses ............................................................................................... 61 Method .............................................................................................................................