Utilizing the articulated thoughts in simulated situations paradigm to examine the differential impacts of anti-gay verbal aggression and non-biased verbal aggression on heterosexual and sexual minority male college students

The significance of verbal aggression has traditionally been underappreciated by society and scholars alike, as has the fact that, in addition to sexual minorities, heterosexuals can be and are targets of anti-gay aggression. This study examines whether the experience of being the target of anti-gay verbal aggression differs from that of non-bias verbal aggression and whether the impacts of these two forms differ for heterosexual and sexual minority males. Through the use of the ATSS paradigm, 48 sexual minority and 51 heterosexual males were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: an anti-gay or a non-bias verbal aggression scenario. While initial comparisons indicated that the impacts of the two forms of aggression did not significantly differ from one another, the impacts of these two forms of aggression were found to differ once sexual identity was considered. These results suggest that anti-gay verbal aggression, as compared to non-bias verbal aggression, leads to increased anger, hostility, and aggression amongst heterosexual male targets and increased avoidance amongst sexual minority targets. Factors associated with anti-gay attitudes were not found to explain these differential effects. Compared to less rigid beliefs regarding masculinity, more rigid masculine beliefs, in combination with being the target of anti-gay verbal aggression, were found to be associated with increases in aggressive thought for heterosexual male targets. This effect was reversed for sexual minority males. Findings are discussed in relation to theory and social and institutional policy.