MacInnis & Hodson (2013) needed to look at whether any back link is present between a way of measuring implicit intimate appeal and explicit homophobia in heterosexuals. To do this, the writers utilized an implicit relationship chore (IAT) modified to sexual appeal: an activity which individuals have to classify photographs as male/female and phrase as intimately attractive/unattractive, and also the increase of which they do thus should let you know anything in regards to the cognitive connection involving the two. I am cautious about the interpretations of IATs for many grounds, but I’ll assume for the time being that these types of a test really does certainly types of assess whatever they expect. Participants comprise also inquired about her direct sexual 
destinations to both women and men, as well as their perceptions towards gay/lesbian and heterosexual populations. In total, their sample displayed 237 Canadian undergraduates (85 people).
From the splitting of these trial, MacInnis & Hodson (2013) offered their facts every feasible benefit to select something-even some spurious relationship-but in essence little arose
When I would expect, the IAT listings only correlated modestly with specific measures of sexual interest (roentgen = .37 for males, roentgen = .15 for women). The correlations between those IAT steps and adverse, explicit evaluations of homosexuals for men was r = -.06, and also for lady, roentgen = -.24. To phrase it differently, besides are these types of correlations quite tiny, nevertheless they nominally went in opposite course of this repression accounts: as people confirmed much more implicit attraction to the exact same sex, in addition they showed significantly less explicit negativity. On an equivalent notice, men’s explicit sites toward exact same intercourse negatively correlated using their homophobia aswell (roentgen = -.31), which means as males reported most mindful interest to other boys, they certainly were also a lot more good towards homosexuals. Individuals are more good towards those that resemble them-for good reason-so this is not terribly alarming.
Hence the issue of the homophobia-as-repression theory are highlighted: if only few homophobes is important homosexual, after that homosexuality can not explain much; if many homophobes actually are homosexual, then homophobia are ineffective at convincing people you’re straight
The researchers tried extra analyses also to handle other perceptions from the repression-to-attraction profile. Very first, they separated the data such those that showed positive homosexual implicit attraction are in comparison to those that on the negative side. The male test, it’s worth keeping in mind, couldn’t feel examined here as just 4 of this 85 boys had these a score (perhaps there’s just not a lot implicit attraction floating around?); for women, the exact same getting as before surfaced: those revealing considerably implicit attraction happened to be much less adverse towards homosexuals. Next, the authors made an effort to determine only those from inside the upper-half of homophobia get, immediately after which those in the greater intense ends. However, the implicit interest scores would not vary between those high and reduced in prejudice for men or female. The repression theory wasn’t even recognized if the writers made an effort to identify those participants whoever explicit and implicit attraction score happened to be maximally different from one another (the authors framework this as players overstating their particular heterosexuality on an explicit amount, but we think the particular explanation is the fact that the IAT is not as well great of a tool).
They broke the info down by both women and men; attitudes towards gays, lesbians, and homosexuals generally speaking; those highest or reduced in prejudice; those whose implicit and explicit attractions diverged. Regardless of how it was cut, support was not found the repression concept. Whenever relationships performed live between implicit destination and explicit thinking, it generally went into the opposite movement on the repression hypothesis: those people that demonstrated implicit interest had been decreased negative toward homosexuals (albeit very reasonably). I don’t suspect this may prevent those who stylish the repression hypothesis to abandon it-likely since they value it for causes beyond the founded truth value, in fact it is currently suspicious at best-but it’s a possible place to begin for this journey.