Search

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00316.x Byline: Jeffrey A. Goodman (a), Jonathan Schell (a), Michele G. Alexander (a), Scott Eidelman (a) Abstract: A laboratory experiment examined the impact of a derogatory remark on expressions of prejudice toward a gay male leader. Students participated in same-sex groups with a male confederate who was obviously gay or presumably straight. Half of the participants in the gay condition heard a derogatory remark about the confederate. This resulted in 3 experimental conditions: gay/remark, gay/no remark, and straight/no remark. Participants evaluated the leader's abilities less favorably and evidenced more negative nonverbal behaviors toward him in the gay/remark condition than in the gay/no remark or straight/no remark conditions. These findings extend research on derogatory remarks to a nonracial minority and highlight the powerful effect of immediate social context on expressions of prejudice. Author Affiliation: (a)University of Maine Article note: (2) Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jeffrey A. Goodman, 5742 Little Hall, Department of Psychology, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469-5742. E-mail: jeffrey.goodman@umit.maine.edu

The proliferation of nuclear weapons has long been aimed at deterrence. However, it is argued that the main problem with deterrence is not its effectiveness but the price people must pay should it fail. It is proposed that a less destructive means of balancing military power among nations can be achieved through an agreement on the abolition of nuclear arms, wherein defenses will be used to prevent any violation of an abolition., The means and ends of the doctrine of deterrence, on which we rely today for the safety of the nuclear world, . . . present us with a striking disparity. [...]