Effects of implementation intentions on counterarguing sexual prejudice speech

Hate Speech is verbal expression directed at a targeted group with intent to wound or denigrate its recipient (Boeckmann & Turpin-Petrosino, 2002). Previous research has shown that sexual prejudice speech is detrimental to the mental health of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community (Williams, 1994). One way to directly counteract sexual prejudice speech is through behavioral enactment, specifically verbal response. Implementation Intention (Gollwitzer, 1999), a two phase theory (motivational and volitional), has been shown to effectively enhance behavioral enactment. Supplementing behavioral intention with implementation intention increases the likelihood of behavioral enactment because behaviors occur automatically once the specific time and place are encountered (Gollwitzer & Brandstatter, 1997, study 3).; The present study examined the effect of implementation intentions on counterarguing sexual prejudice speech. After interest levels were assessed, 60 participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 conditions in a 2 (high interest/low interest) x 2 (implementation intention/no implementation intention) design. Each cell contained 15 participants. Participants were asked to make counterarguments to videotaped arguments containing sexual prejudice statements. A confederate manipulation was used to assess automaticity and generalizability of implementation intentions.; Significant main effects on the number of counterarguments, confederate counterargument, and Sexual Prejudice Counterargument scores were found for implementation intention. Moreover, implementation intentions were generalized to a behavioral measure. When given the implementation intention manipulation, not only do participants counterargue more frequently, they do so in a more effective way (i.e., their arguments are more numerous, relevant, cogent, and of higher quality). The results further suggested that interest is necessary but not sufficient to lead one to counterargue. Using the Johnson-Neyman technique, a region of significance was determined for interest. Furthermore it indicated that in order for implementation intentions to be effective, a minimum level of interest was needed.; These findings are imperative to the future of lesbian, gay, and bisexual awareness and safety. Based on these results, it is suggested that implementation intentions is a promising technique for counterarguing sexual prejudice speech. Implications of these findings, limitations of the study, as well as future directions for research are discussed.