Gregory M. Herek’s research while affiliated with University of California, Davis and other places

Hate crimes based on the victim’s perceived sexual orientation or gender identity first came to be identified in the United States as a social problem requiring national attention in the 1980s. Since then, the need for accurate documentation of the incidence and prevalence of such crimes has been an ongoing concern for policymakers, advocates, and law enforcement personnel seeking to understand their extent and track annual trends. This article describes and provides some historical context for 4 general documentation sources: victim reports to community antiviolence organizations, community surveys conducted with nonprobability samples of sexual and gender minority respondents, data from local law enforcement agencies compiled annually by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and surveys conducted with national probability samples. Each source type’s strengths, limitations, and appropriate uses should be considered when citing hate crimes data. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

This article addresses the topic of homophobia. Recent events might make it seem as though it is dying out. Hate crimes based on a person's sexual orientation or gender presentation can now be prosecuted by the federal government, even when they occur in states lacking their own hate crime laws. Numerous states have changed their laws to permit same-sex couples to marry, some through the passage of legislation and others through ballot measures. Since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 decision overturning part of the Defense of Marriage Act, those marriages have been recognized by the federal government. With the dramatic and relatively rapid turnaround in public opinion, this article focuses on the changes in stigma and issues of sexual prejudice as well.

This article describes a social psychological framework for understanding sexual stigma, and it reports data on sexual minority individuals’ stigma-related experiences. The framework distinguishes between stigma’s manifestations in society’s institutions (heterosexism) and among individuals. The latter include enacted sexual stigma (overt negative actions against sexual minorities, such as hate crimes), felt sexual stigma (expectations about the circumstances in which sexual stigma will be enacted), and internalized sexual stigma (personal acceptance of sexual stigma as part of one’s value system and self-concept). Drawing from previous research on internalized sexual stigma among heterosexuals (i.e., sexual prejudice), the article considers possible parallels in how sexual minorities experience internalized sexual stigma (i.e., self-stigma, or negative attitudes toward the self). Data are presented from a community sample of lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults (N = 2,259) to illustrate the model’s utility for generating and testing hypotheses concerning self-stigma.

Using a community sample of 197 people living with HIV/AIDS, we examined how awareness of societal stigma (felt stigma) and negative feelings toward oneself as a member of a stigmatized group (self-stigma) are related to psychological well-being. Both felt stigma and self-stigma were significantly correlated with symptoms of depression and anxiety, but controlling for felt stigma reduced self-stigma's association with depressive symptoms to nonsignificance. Global self-esteem and social avoidance fully mediated the associations between self-stigma and distress but only partially mediated the associations between felt stigma and distress. Felt stigma mediated the relationship between distress and HIV-related changes in physical appearance.

Despite shifts toward greater acceptance in U.S. public opinion and policy, lesbian, gay, and bisexual people remain widely stigmatized. This article reviews empirical research on sexual prejudice, that is, heterosexuals' internalization of cultural stigma, manifested in the form of negative attitudes toward sexual minorities and same-sex desires and behaviors. After briefly reviewing measurement issues, we discuss linkages between sexual prejudice and religion, gender, sexuality, and related variables, and consider how the cultural institutions encompassing these domains create a social context within which individual expressions of prejudice can meet important psychological needs. These include needs for securing social acceptance, affirming values that are central to one's self-concept, and avoiding anxiety and other negative emotions associated with threats to self-esteem. We conclude by discussing factors that may motivate heterosexuals to reduce their own sexual prejudice, including intergroup contact, as well as avenues for future empirical inquiry. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology Volume 64 is November 30, 2012. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/catalog/pubdates.aspx for revised estimates.

This article summarizes a stigma-based analysis of anti-equality marriage laws and campaigns. Three major themes are discussed. First, being denied the legal right to marry because of one's sexual orientation is an instance of stigma. Second, being the target of stigma is stressful, and the political campaigns surrounding anti-equality marriage amendments are a source of heightened stress for lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Third, structural and individual manifestations of sexual stigma are interrelated; the initial enactment and continuing existence of anti-equality marriage laws depend on the opinions and actions of the voting public. Social psychological knowledge can be useful for understanding heterosexuals’ attitudes toward those laws. Building on findings from studies of prejudice and intergroup contact, suggestions are offered for future research on how individuals influence the opinions of their family and friends about marriage equality.

It is useful to recall that our work as scientists will be at its best when it simultaneously tackles real-world problems and enriches our understanding of basic biological, psychological, or social processes. A good theory can help us do both. All empirical research is based on assumptions. Even purely “descriptive” or “exploratory” studies necessarily involve choices about the phenomena and variables to observe and the level of detail at which to observe them. Researchers planning an empirical study confront the challenges of making these assumptions explicit, examining them critically, and designing the investigation to yield data that permit those assumptions to be evaluated and modified appropriately. This is the process of theory construction. Unfortunately, although all research is based on theory, many grant proposals lack a well-developed theoretical rationale. The theoretical framework often remains implicit in the proposal without being formally articulated. Consequently, even though the application may be based on a good idea, it is conceptually weak and receives a poor priority/impact score. This chapter will give you a useful strategy for developing a clearly articulated theoretical framework for your research project and using it to write your entire research plan.

This article briefly describes how psychology, psychiatry, and the mental health professions (here collectively referred to as Psychology) treated sexual orientation differences as deficits for much of the 20th century, as well as some of the negative consequences that practice had for sexual minorities. The 1970s witnessed a remarkable turnaround when the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the American Psychological Association called for psychologists to work to remove the stigma historically associated with homosexuality. This history illustrates not only how cultural institutions play a central role in legitimating stigma, but also how they can recognize their own complicity in this process and work effectively to undo its harmful effects. It is argued that Psychology still has an important role to play in challenging the differences-as-deficits model in contemporary policy debates. © The Author(s) 2010.

Using data from a US national probability sample of self-identified lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults (N = 662), this article reports population parameter estimates for a variety of demographic, psychological, and social variables. Special emphasis is given to information with relevance to public policy and law. Compared with the US adult population, respondents were younger, more highly educated, and less likely to be non-Hispanic White, but differences were observed between gender and sexual orientation groups on all of these variables. Overall, respondents tended to be politically liberal, not highly religious, and supportive of marriage equality for same-sex couples. Women were more likely than men to be in a committed relationship. Virtually all coupled gay men and lesbians had a same-sex partner, whereas the vast majority of coupled bisexuals were in a heterosexual relationship. Compared with bisexuals, gay men and lesbians reported stronger commitment to a sexual-minority identity, greater community identification and involvement, and more extensive disclosure of their sexual orientation to others. Most respondents reported experiencing little or no choice about their sexual orientation. The importance of distinguishing among lesbians, gay men, bisexual women, and bisexual men in behavioral and social research is discussed.