Search

Sexual orientation has been defined as an enduring aspect of the self, but emerging evidence reveals that people's sexual attractions, behaviors, and identities can shift over time. To examine this possibility, we present a large longitudinal analysis of sexual orientation identity fluidity among New Zealand adults (Ntotal = 45,856; age = 18–99; lesbian, gay, bisexual, and other sexual minority (LGB+) ns = 746–3,387). Over seven years, 5.7% of participants changed sexual identities at least once. Change was bi-directional (i.e. toward and away from LGB+ identities) and most common in people who initially reported a plurisexual identity. Although women reported higher rates of plurisexuality than men, they were not more fluid in their identities, contradicting the notion of male fixedness and female plasticity in sexuality. Moreover, openness to experience was associated with increased odds of changing from a heterosexual to a plurisexual identity, while political liberalism and lower conscientiousness were associated with increased odds of changing from a heterosexual to a plurisexual identity and more identity changes over time. Overall, our study shows that sexual identity can be fluid into adulthood and has implications for how we understand contemporary human sexuality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: There is growing evidence of intergroup hostility between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, a process of polarization that threatens to derail population health efforts. This study explores the moral underpinnings of intergroup antipathy between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Design: A cross‐sectional design was employed to investigate the associations between the view of vaccination as a social contract or individual choice, perceived vulnerability to disease, perceptions of outgroup morality, feelings of warmth, and experiences of schadenfreude. Methods: Data were extracted from an online, quantitative survey of 233 vaccinated and 237 unvaccinated participants collected between June and July 2022. Results: Results revealed that vaccinated people had stronger negative attitudes towards unvaccinated people than vice versa. In line with hypotheses, the extent to which vaccinated people saw vaccination as a social contract was significantly associated with perceiving unvaccinated people as immoral. For unvaccinated people, seeing vaccination as an individual choice (the opposite of a social contract) was significantly associated with perceiving vaccinated people as immoral. Among both groups, viewing the other as immoral was associated with feeling significantly less warmth towards the opposing vaccination group, and more schadenfreude in the face of an outgroup member's suffering. Participants' perceived vulnerability to disease played a relatively small role in explaining polarization between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Conclusions: This research builds on previous studies by identifying moral mechanisms associated with intergroup antipathy in the vaccine debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lay beliefs about human trait heritability are consequential for cooperation and social cohesion, yet there has been no global characterisation of these beliefs. Participants from 30 countries (N = 6128) reported heritability beliefs for intelligence, personality, body weight and criminality, and transnational factors that could influence these beliefs were explored using public nation-level data. Globally, mean lay beliefs differ from published heritability (h 2) estimated by twin studies, with a worldwide majority overestimating the heritability of personality and intelligence, and underestimating body weight and criminality. Criminality was seen as substantially less attributable to genes than other traits. People from countries with high infant mortality tended to ascribe greater heritability for most traits, relative to people from low infant mortality countries. This study provides the first systematic foray into worldwide lay heritability beliefs. Future research must incorporate diverse global perspectives to further contextualise and extend upon these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the March 15th Christchurch terrorist attack, members of our research team have been repeatedly asked to comment or provide summary statistics from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (NZAVS) on prejudice toward Muslims. As the curators of the NZAVS, we think that these findings should be in the public domain and accessible to as wide an audience as possible. In this article, we aim to provide a comprehensive summary of what we know from the NZAVS about attitudes toward Muslims and prejudice in New Zealand more generally. From 2012 onwards, the NZAVS included a feeling thermometer rating of people's level of warmth toward Muslims. Here, we summarize what we know from the NZAVS about levels of warmth toward Muslims in the New Zealand population. We describe the distribution of thermometer ratings of warmth toward Muslims annually from 2012 onward, and compare these with thermometer ratings of a range of other groups that we also track. We present a regression model documenting the extent to which a broad range of demographics and aspects of personality are associated with low levels of warmth toward Muslims, and present a parallel model assessing warmth ratings toward immigrants as a comparison. Finally, we present a series of growth curve models outlining the relative level and rate of change over time in warmth toward Muslims and other groups from 2012-2018. Results from these analyses indicate that over the 2012-2018 period, levels of warmth toward Muslims in New Zealand were comparatively low relative to warmth ratings of other groups. However, warmth toward Muslims has also been steadily but gradually increasing over time in New Zealand. Keywords: Prejudice, Muslim, Christchurch Terrorist Attack, Feeling Thermometer, Introduction The shock and horror of the March 15th 2019 terrorist attack in Christchurch will shape our nation for many years to come. With 51 Muslim men, women, and children [...]