A study about attitudes toward transgender: a transparent hate or a colourful love?

Universidade do Minho Escola de Psicologia Ana Raquel Machado Guimarães A study about attitudes toward transgenders: a transparent hate or a colourful love? janeiro de 2021 A study about Attitudes toward transgenders: a transparent hate or a colourful love? Raquel Guimarães UMinho |2021 22022019 Universidade do Minho Escola de Psicologia Ana Raquel Machado Guimarães A study about Attitudes toward transgender: a transparent hate or a colourful love? Dissertação de Mestrado Mestrado Integrado em Psicologia Trabalho efetuado sob a orientação da Professora Doutora Joana Arantes Janeiro de 2021 ii iii Acknowledgments “First, think. Second, dream. Third, believe. And finally, dare”, Walt Disney Foram muitos os dias em que um post-it com esta frase se colocou diante dos meus olhos como uma onda que me movimentava entre as palavras e as ações. “Primeiro, pensa. Pensa num tema que suscite curiosidade e motivação. Segundo, Sonha. Sonha com as mudanças que podias fazer no mundo. Terceiro acredita. Acredita que tudo é possível, até mesmo o impossível. E, por último, desafia-te. Desafia o teu conhecimento e o teu conceito do mundo.” Foi dentro desta dança de etapas que um objetivo se criou, e que, em muito tenho a agradecer às pessoas me orientaram, motivaram, incentivaram e ensinaram durante esta jornada. Primeiramente, quero agradecer a uma pessoa muito especial, que tornou esta realidade impossível numa realidade possível. Uma pessoa que sempre se demonstrou disponível para atender às minhas necessidades, que me prestou auxílio e orientação em vários contextos deste ano letivo. Uma pessoa que me ensinou a evoluir no campo da investigação, que me ajudou a aprender cada vez mais sobre psicologia e que me desenvolveu enquanto ser humano. É com muito orgulho e honra que chamei e, para sempre, irei chamar de minha orientadora, a Professora Doutora Joana Arantes. O meu mais profundo obrigada por tudo! Aos meus colegas de laboratório de Psicologia Evolutiva, que me acompanharam nesta aventura, gostaria de agradecer todos comentários, sugestões e incentivo. À minha amiga e companheira de investigação, queria agradecer por toda a paciência, por todo o suporte e por toda a entreajuda. Aos meus pais e amigos pelo apoio constante, pelo trampolim que me fez escalar os mais diversos desafios e me permitiram ver para além do muro, uma realidade muito linda. UM MUITO OBRIGADA A TODOS! iv Despacho RT - 31 /2019 - Anexo 4 STATEMENT OF INTEGRITY I hereby declare having conducted this academic work with integrity. I confirm that I have not used plagiarism or any form of undue use of information or falsification of results along the process leading to its elaboration. I further declare that I have fully acknowledged the Code of Ethical Conduct of the University of Minho. Braga, 19 de Janeiro de 2020 v Um estudo sobre atitudes perante transgéneros: um ódio transparente ou um amor colorido? Resumo A transfobia é sustentada por atitudes negativas, preconceituosas, discriminatórias e de assédio em detrimento de homens e mulheres transgéneros, enraizada nas aprendizagens sociais, políticas, educacionais e religiosas. O presente estudo tem como objetivo estudar a relação entre a empatia, a auto-estima, a religiosidade e a idade nas atitudes negativas perante homens e mulheres transgéneros. Também pretendemos determinar o poder explicativo coletivo e único dessas variáveis na predição das atitudes em relação aos transgéneros. A amostra final compreendeu 538 participantes (431 mulheres e 106 homens) que responderam a um questionário sociodemográfico, à Escala das Atitudes em Relação aos Homens e Mulheres Transgéneros (EARHMT), ao Índex de Reatividade Interpessoal (IRI) e à Escala de Auto-Estima de Rosenberg (EAER), para avaliar as variáveis do estudo. Os resultados mostraram que pessoas mais religiosas, com mais idade, e com menos empatia tendem a ter atitudes negativas em relação a homens e mulheres transgéneros. Além disso, mostraram que empatia e a religiosidade são preditores das atitudes em relação a transgéneros. Os resultados salientam a relevância da educação inclusiva para a diminuição dos crimes de ódio, e têm várias implicações, inclusivamente para contextos clínicos, forenses, desportivos, organizacionais e de investigação. Palavras-chave: Autoestima, Empatia, Idade, Religiosidade e Transfobia vi A study about attitudes toward transgender: a transparent hate or a colourful love? Abstract Transphobia is supported by negative, prejudiced, discriminatory and harassing attitudes toward transgender men and women, rooted in social, political, educational, and religious learning. The present study aims to perceive the relationship between empathy, selfesteem, religiosity and age on negative attitudes towards transgender men and women. We also aim to determine the collective and unique explanatory power of these variables in predicting attitudes towards transgender. The final sample comprised 538 participants (431 women and 106 men) who completed a sociodemographic questionnaire, the Attitudes Toward Transgender Men and Women (ATTMW) Scales, the Interpersonal Reactivity (IR) Index, and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSES),. Results showed that individuals more religious, less empathic and older tended to have more negative attitudes towards transgender. In addition, our results showed that empathy and religiosity were predictors of attitudes towards transgender men and women. Results have several implications, including for clinical settings. Results highlight the relevance of an inclusive education for the decrease of hate crimes, and have several implications, including in clinical, forensic, sports, organizational and research contexts. Keywords: Age, Empathy, Religiousness, Self-Esteem and Transphobia Index Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 12 Method ..................................................................................................................................... 15 Participants ........................................................................................................................... 15 Measures .............................................................................................................................. 16 Statistical Analysis ................................................................................................................ 18 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 19 Correlational analyses .......................................................................................................... 22 Regression analyses predicting ATTM and ATTW ................................................................ 23 Sex differences ...................................................................................................................... 23 Literacy differences ............................................................................................................... 24 Participants with and without divorced parents .................................................................. 26 Participants with and without LGBTQIA+ friends ................................................................. 26 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 28 Bibliography.............................................................................................................................. 32 ANEXOS .................................................................................................................................... 41 Table Index Table 1. Saturation Values........................................................................................................ 19 Table 2. Correlational Analyses between empathy, self-esteem, ATTM, ATTW, age and religiosity .................................................................................................................................. 22 Table 3. Multiple regression models predicting ATTM and ATTW ........................................... 23 Figure Index Figure 1. Factorial Confimatory Analyses (ATTM) .................................................................... 21 Figure 2. Factorial Confirmatory Analyses (ATTW) .................................................................. 21 Figure 3. Sex Differences .......................................................................................................... 24 Figure 4. Literacy Differences ................................................................................................... 25 Figure 5. Participants with or without divorced parents’ differences ...................................... 26 Figure 6. Participants with or without LGBTQIA+ friends’ differences.……………………………… 27 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii This scale was used to assess the self-esteem of the participants. It consists of 10 items and includes a 4-point Likert scale, from 0 (Strongly disagree) to 4 (Strongly agree). Sample items include “On the whole, I am satisfied with myself” and “I take a positive attitude toward myself”. Average scores were obtained by adding these items together after reversing the inverted items. Higher scores on the scale indicate higher self-esteem. In terms of psychometric values, the RSES demonstrates good internal reliability (α = .88, Rosenberg, 1986; α = .79, Pechorro & Moroco, 2011). Procedure Since the ATTMW Scale (Billard, 2018) had not been previously translated and validated to the Portuguese population, the standard procedure for adapting scales in crosscultural research were followed (Geisinger, 1994). The instrument was carefully translated into European Portuguese and language adequacy for all items was discussed. After that, the translated instrument was translated back to English by a bilingual researcher and compared with the original one. No major discrepancies were noted. All items from both instruments were discussed in our research lab for linguistic and theoretical. Participants did not receive monetary compensation, and were recruited through personal and institutional e-mails, online social networks (e.g., Facebook), and the website of the Evolutionary Psychology Group from the University of Minho. They answered first to the socio-demographic questionnaire, followed by the Attitudes Toward Transgender Men and Women (ATTMW) Scale, Interpersonal Reactivity (IR) Index, and Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSES), in a counterbalanced order. Participants’ responses were recorded anonymously on an Internet webpage using Qualtrics software from the Qualtrics Research Suite (www.qualtrics.com). Statistical Analysis The collected data were placed in an Excel ® file and imported into the statistical software Statistical Package for Social Sciences ® (IBM SPSS ®; version 27). Analyses were conducted with Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS; v. 27), and included: i) correlations to evaluate the associations among variables, namely empathy, self-esteem, ATTM, ATTW, age and religiosity; ii) t tests to examine sex differences, and differences A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii between participants with and without divorced parents, with and without LGBTQIA+ friends, with and without LGBTQIA+ family members, with and without children, and with and without a romantic partner; iii) unidirectional analyses of variance (ANOVA) to investigate possible differences between participants with different educational backgrounds, marital status, socioeconomic levels, places of residence, and religions. In addition, confirmatory factor analyses were performed using AMOS software (v. 20). As recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999), we reported several indices of model fit, namely the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), χ2, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), Normed Fit Index, and Bollen’s Incremental Fit Index (IFI). A criterion of p < 0.05 was used for significance tests. Results Since the ATTMW has not been previously translated and validated to Portuguese, initially we investigated the psychometric properties of the translated instrument. First, analyses of the instrument' sensitivity via frequency tables and distributions of the data showed that all items had good sensitivity (i.e., all response categories were represented in the sample). Second, construct validity was assessed by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, after confirming the factorability of the data through the Bartlett sphericity test (p < .001, for both subscales) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test (ATTM: .95; ATTW: .94). A principal component factor analysis with Varimax rotation performed on each subscale produced single-factor structures of the ATTM and the ATTW subscales. This is consistent with the original study (Billard, 2018), that analyzed items regarding transgender men and transgender women separately to develop two independent subscales. The single-factor structure accounted for 60.24% of the variance in the ATTM and 62.58 in the ATTW. All items had a loading ≥ .33 in the ATTM and ≥ .65 in the ATTW (see Table 1). Table 1 Saturation Values. Item EFA Loading ATTM 1. Transgender men will never really be men. 0.860 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii ATTM 2. Transgender men are not really men. 0.784 ATTM 3. Transgender men are only able to look like men, but not be men. 0.883 ATTM 4. Transgender men are unable to accept who they really are. 0.764 ATTM 5. Transgender men are trying to be someone they’re not. 0.784 ATTM 6. Transgender men seem absolutely normal to me.* 0.331 ATTM 7. Transgender men are denying their DNA. 0.805 ATTM 8. Transgender men cannot just “identify” as men. 0.784 ATTM 9. Transgender men are misguided.* 0.840 ATTM 10. Transgender men are unnatural. 0.780 ATTM 11. Transgender men don’t really understand what it means to be a man. 0.840 ATTM 12. Transgender men are emotionally unstable.* 0.712 ATTW 1. Transgender women will never really be women. 0.834 ATTW 2. Transgender women are only able to look like women, but not be women. 0.806 ATTW 3. Transgender women are not really women. 0.818 ATTW 4. Transgender women are trying to be someone they’re not. 0.863 ATTW 5. Transgender women are unnatural. 0.779 ATTW 6. Transgender women don’t really understand what it means to be a woman. 0.843 ATTW 7. Transgender women cannot just “identify” as women. 0.797 ATTW 8. Transgender women are unable to accept who they really are. 0.779 ATTW 9. Transgender women only think they are women.* 0.651 ATTW 10. Transgender women are defying nature.* 0.740 ATTW 11. Transgender women are denying their DNA. 0.812 ATTW 12. There is something unique about being a woman that transgender women can never experience.* .748 The single-factor structures of the ATTM and the ATTW subscales were confirmed through CFA using the AMOS software (v. 27). More specifically, a CFA was initially run on the ATTM (Figure 1). The fit of the model was good, χ2(54) = 427.60, p < 0.001, comparative fit index A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii (CFI) = 0.91, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.87, Normed Fit Index (NFI) = .90, and Bollen’s Incremental Fit Index (IFI) = .91. Then, a CFA was run on the ATTW (Figure 2). The fit of the model was also good, χ2(54) = 636.26, p < 0.001, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.87, TuckerLewis index (TLI) = 0.81, Normed Fit Index (NFI) = .86, and Bollen’s Incremental Fit Index (IFI) = .87. Figure 1. Factorial Confimatory Analyses (ATTM) Figure 2. Factorial Confimatory Analyses (ATTMW) Third, the instrument revealed good internal reliability (ATTM: α = .93; ATTW: α = .94). Also, the Cronbach's did not increase considerably when any items were removed, confirming that all items should be retained for the scale. Fourth, distributions for individual variables were examined and averages compared with the original study. Results showed that participants in our study scored lower than participants in the original study (M = 3.5; SD = 1.9; n = 238) in the ATTM subscale, t(340) = 10.85, p < .001. A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Similarly, our participants also scored lower than participants in the original study (M = 2.05; SD = 1.2; n = 538) in the ATTM subscale, t(340) = 10.85, p < .001. Correlational analyses Table 2 shows the correlation between age, religiousness, empathy, self-esteem, Attitudes Toward Transgender Men (ATTM), and Attitudes Toward Transgender Woman (ATTW). Age was positively correlated with self-esteem (r = .26, p = .00), ATTM (r = .12, p = .01), and ATTW (r = .11, p = .02), and negatively correlated with empathy (r = -.12, p = .01). That means that older individuals tend to have higher self-esteem, more negative attitudes toward both transgender men and transgender women, and less empathy. Religiousness was positively correlated with empathy (r = .15, p = .001), ATTM (r = .11, p = .02) and ATTW (r = .10, p = .03). These results show that individuals that are more religious have a tendency to be have more empathy and more negative attitudes toward both transgender men and transgender women. Empathy was negatively correlated with ATTM (r = -.24, p = .00) and ATTW (r = -.25, p = .00), showing that individuals that have higher levels of empathy, tend to have less negative attitudes toward transgender men and women. Self-Esteem was positively correlated with ATTM (r = .10, p = .04), showing that individuals with higher levels of selfesteem tend to have more negative attitudes toward transgender man. Finally, ATTM was positively correlated with ATTW (r = .94, p = .00), showing that individuals that express more negative attitudes toward transgender men also tend to express more negative attitudes toward transgender women. Table 2 Correlational Analyses between empathy, self-esteem, ATTM, ATTW, age and religiosity Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. Age ─ 0,005 -,117* ,258** ,123** ,106* 2. Religiousness ─ ,151** 0,049 ,108* ,104* 3. Empathy ─ -0,048 -,238** -,251** 4. Self-esteem ─ ,099* 0,084 5. ATTM ─ ,937** A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001 Regression analyses predicting ATTM and ATTW The zero-order correlations presented above demonstrate that age, religiousness, and empathy were associated with ATTM and ATTW. Self-esteem was only associated with ATTM and not ATTW. However, because some of these variables were low-to-moderately intercorrelated, it was of interest to determine the collective and unique explanatory power of these variables. Therefore, we performed multiple regression analyses wherein the subscales of the ATTMW (i.e., ATTM and ATTW) were each simultaneously regressed onto these four predictor variables. Analyses are presented in Table 3 The model measured the variables collectively explained approximately 9% of the total variance in ATTM (8.5%) and ATTW (9.2%). The standardized regression coefficients (βs) for the specific variables indicated that religiousness and empathy were the stronger predictors of all criterion variables. These patterns support the deduction that religiousness and empathy were the strongest and unique predictors of negative attitudes towards transgender men and women. Table 3 Multiple regression models predicting ATTM and ATTW Variable ATTM ATTW  P  P Model Age Religiousness Empathy Self-esteem Model r2 .076 .134 -.243 .058 .085 .106 .004 .000 .217 .068 .142 -.262 .047 .092 .151 .002 .000 .318 * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001 Sex differences In order to investigate possible sex differences, independent t tests were conducted (see Figure 3). Results showed that male participants tended to be older (Mage = 30.31, SD = 12.79), 6. ATTW ─ A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii less religious (Mreligousness = 2.63, SD = 1.68), and less empathic (Mempathy = 3.29, SD = .44) than female participants (Mage = 26.44, SD = 9.39, Mreligousness = 3.04, SD = 1.58, Mempathy = 3.6, SD = .47), t(134.34) = 2.93, p < .001, t(533) = -2.36, p < .05 and t(463) = -5.685, p <.001, respectively. On the other hand, males tend to point higher in ATTM (MATTM = 2.71, SD = 1.65) and ATTW (MATTW = 2.79, SD = 1.80) than females (MATTM = 1.89, SD = 1.01, MATTW = 1.86, SD = 1.05 ), t(101.48) = 4.426, p < .001 and t(99.86) = 4.625, p < .001, respectively. Figure 3 Sex Differences Literacy differences Unidirectional ANOVAs were performed to examine possible differences in age, religiousness, empathy, self-esteem, ATTM and AATTW depending on educational background of the participants (see Figure 4). Results showed a significant effect of age, F(5,530) = 32.811, p < .001. Post-hoc Bonferroni tests showed that participants who only completed the third cycle tended to be older (M = 31.50, SD = 13.142) than participants that finished high school (M = 22.51, SD = 7.921), p < .05, and younger than participants that completed a PhD (M = 42.60, SD = 10.07), p < .01. In addition, participants who finished high school tended to be younger 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Age Religiousness Empathy Self-Esteem ATTM ATTW Average score Sex Differences Men Women *** *** *** *** * * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; Note. Average scores of ages, religiousness, empathy, self-esteem, ATTM and ATTW, shown separately for males (light gray) and females (dark gray). Bars indicate + 1 SE. A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii (M = 22.51, SD = 7.921) than those who completed graduation (M = 27.31, SD = 10.51), p < .001, a master’s degree (M = 28.69, SD = 6.96), p < .001, PhD (M = 42.60, SD = 10.07), p < .001, or other (M = 37.00, SD = 13.279), p < .001. Finally, participants who had a PHD (M = 42.60, SD = 10.07), tended to be older than those who had a graduation (M = 27.31, SD = 10.51), p < .001, and a master’s degree (M = 28.69, SD = 6.96), p < .001. Results also showed a significant effect of self-esteem, F(5,462) = 8.11, p < .001. Post-hoc Bonferroni tests showed that participants who completed a PHD (M = 3.42, SD = .48) tended to have higher self-esteem than those who completed the third cycle (M = 2.77, SD = .77), p < .05, high school (M = 2.845, SD = .61), p < .001, and graduation (M = 3.02, SD = .50), p < .01. Similarly, individuals with a master’s degree (M = 3.16, SD = .54) tended to have higher selfesteem than those who completed high school (M = 2.845, SD = .61), p < .001. Moreover, results showed a significant effect of ATTM, F(5,455) = 3.124, p < .01. Post-hoc Bonferroni tests showed that participants who completed a PHD tended to have more negative attitudes towards transgender men (MATTM = 2.88, SD =1.20) than participant that completed high school (MATTM = 2.00, SD = 1.18), p < .01, graduation (MATTM = 1.97, SD = 1.18), p < .01, and a master’s degree (MATTM = 1.97, SD = 1.09), p < .01. Figure 4 Literacy Differences A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; Note. Average scores of ages, religiousness, empathy, self-esteem, ATTM and ATTW, shown separately for literacy degree completed. Bars indicate + 1 SE. Participants with and without divorced parents In order to assess if there were any differences between participants whose parents got divorced and those whose parents did not get divorced before they were 18 years old, independent t-tests were conducted (Figure 5). Results showed that participants who had divorced parents tended to be younger (Mage = 23.95, DP = 6.75), to have less self-esteem (Mself-esteem = 2.84, DP = .55) and to have less negative attitudes towards transgender men (MATTM = 1.82, DP = 1.14), than those who did not have divorced parents (Mage = 27.99, DP = 10.88; Mself-esteem = 3.06, DP = .57; MATTM = 2.10, DP = 1.21), t(217.43) = -4.692 and p < .001, t(468) = -3.42 and p < .001, and t(460) = -2.01 and p < .05. Figure 5 Participants with or without divorced parents’ differences Participants with and without LGBTQIA+ friends An independent t-test showed that participants who had LGBTQIA+ friends’ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersexual, asexual, with another sexual orientation or 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Age Religiousness Empathy Self-Esteem ATTM ATTW Average Score Divorced Parents Differences With Divorced Parents Without Divorced Parents *** *** * * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; Note. Average scores of ages, religiousness, empathy, self-esteem, ATTM and ATTW, shown separately for participants with divorced parents (light gray) and non-divorced parents (dark gray). Bars indicate + 1 SE. A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii gender identity friends’) tended to be younger (Mage = 26.24, DP = 9.56), less religious (Mreligiousiness = 2.82, DP = 1.57), with higher self-esteem (Mself-esteem = 2.99, DP = .59), and less negative attitudes towards transgender men (MATTM = 1.96, DP = 1.12) and transgender women (MATTW = 1.95, DP = 1.22), than those who did not have LGBTQIA+ friends (Mage = 30.14, DP = 11.98; Mreligiousiness = 3.35, DP = 1.63; MSelf-Esteem = 3.11, DP = .52; MATTM = 2.30, DP = 1.39; MATTW = 2.27, DP = 1.40), t(216.34) = -3.532, p < .001, t(531) = -3.465, p < .001, t(468) = -2.06, p < .05, t(177.96) = -2.43 and p <.01 and t(193.11) = -2.27 and p < .05, respectively (Figure 6). Figure 6 Participants with or without LGBTQIA+ friends’ differences It is important to note that further unidirectional analyses were conducted in order to investigate if there were any differences between participants with different marital status, socioeconomic levels, places of residence, and religions. However, no significant effects of ATTM or ATTW were obtained (ps > .05). Moreover, additional t tests were performed to examine possible differences between individuals with and without children, with and without 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Age Religiousness Empathy Self-Esteem ATTM ATTW Averege Score Having LGBTQIA+ Friends Differences With LGBTQIA+ Friends Without LGBTQIA+ Friends *** *** *** * * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; Note. Average scores of ages, religiousness, empathy, self-esteem, ATTM and ATTW, shown separately for participants with LGBTQIA+ friends (light gray) and without LGBTQIA+ friends (dark gray). Bars indicate + 1 SE. A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Cava, P. (2016). Cisgender and cissexual. The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of gender and sexuality studies, 1-4. Chen, Y.-C., Chen, C.-C., Decety, J., & Cheng, Y. (2014). Aging is associated with changes in the neural circuits underlying empathy. Neurobiology of Aging, 35(4), 827–836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.10.080 Clark, K. A., & Hughto, J. M. (2020). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Transgender Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs (T-KAB) scale. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 17(3), 353-363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-019-00399-9 Daley, A., Solomon, S., Newman, P. A., & Mishna, F. (2007). Traversing the margins: Intersectionalities in the bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 19(3-4), 9–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10538720802161474 Davis, E. J., Lobach, I., & Dubal, D. B. (2019). Female XX sex chromosomes increase survival and extend lifespan in aging mice. Aging Cell, 18(1), e12871. https://doi.org/10.1111/acel.12871 Davis, M.H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology 10, 1–19. Davis, M.H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44, 113–126 DeWall, C. N., & Baumeister, R. F. (2006). Alone but feeling no pain: Effects of social exclusion on physical pain tolerance and pain threshold, affective forecasting, and interpersonal empathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1), 1– 15. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.1 Dewinter, J., De Graaf, H. & Begeer, S. (2017). Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Romantic Relationships in Adolescents and Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. J Autism Dev Disord 47, 2927–2934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3199-9 Drescher, J. (2010). Transsexualism, gender identity disorder and the DSM. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 14(2), 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/19359701003589637 Fisk N. (1974). Gender dysphoria syndrome (the how, what, and why of a disease). In Proceedings of the Second Interdisciplinary Symposium on Gender Dysphoria Syndrome. CA: Stanford Univ. Press, 7–14. A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Foell, J., Brislin, S. J., Drislane, L. E., Dziobek, I., & Patrick, C. J. (2018). Creation and validation of an English-language version of the Multifaceted Empathy Test (MET). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 40(3), 431-439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-018-9664-8. Forde, A. (2011). Evolutionary Theory of Mate Selection and Partners of Trans People: A Qualitative Study Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. The Qualitative Report, 16(5), 1407-1434. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol16/iss5/12 Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 304–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/10403590.6.4.304 George, R., & Stokes, M. A. (2018). Sexual orientation in autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 11(1), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1362361317714587. Gerhardstein, K. R., & Anderson, V. N. (2010). There’s more than meets the eye: Facial appearance and evaluations of transsexual people. Sex Roles 62, 361–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199010-9746-x. Griffiths, D. A. (2018). Shifting syndromes: Sex chromosome variations and intersex classifications. Social Studies of Science, 48(1), 125–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312718757081 Guimarães, Dionísio & Arantes [sub]. Evidências de validade da versão portuguesa da Escala de Atitudes em Relação a Homens e Mulheres Trans. Avaliação Psicológica Haider-Markel, D. P., Miller, P., Flores, A., Lewis, D. C., Tadlock, B. & Taylor. J. (2017). “Bringing “T” to the Table: Understanding Individual Support of Transgender Candidates for Public Office.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 5(3): 399–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2016.1272472 Hakeem, A. (2018). Trans: Exploring Gender Identity and Gender Dysphoria. Trigger Press. Harcourt, J. (2006). Current issues in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) health: introduction. Journal of Homosexuality, 51(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v51n01_01 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Hardy, M. S. (1995). The Psychology of Sexual Orientation, Behavior, and Identity: A Handbook. Greenwood Publishing Group, Connecticut, pp. 425-443. Harley, J. M., Liu, Y., Ahn, B. T., Lajoie, S. P., & Grace, A. P. (2020). Examining physiological and self‐report indicators of empathy during learners’ interaction with a queer history app. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 1920-1937. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13019 Haslam, C., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J., Cruwys, T., & Steffens, N. K. (2020). Life Change, Social Identity, and Health. Annual Review of Psychology, 72(1). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-060120-111721 Hill, D.B., & Willoughby, B.L.B. (2005). The development and validation of the Genderism and Transphobia Scale. Sex Roles, 53(7–8), 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-0057140-x. Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 Hund, A., & Thomas, J. (2015). Cisgender therapists working with transgender clients: Building cultural empathy and clinical competence from an outgroup position. In Dennis H. May Conference on Diversity Issues and the Role of Counselling Centres, Amherst, MA. Joel, D. & Vikhanski, L. (2020). Cérebro e Género: Para lá do mito do cérebro masculino e feminino. Temas e Debates – Círculo de Leitores. Jordan, C. H., Spencer, S. J., & Zanna, M. P. (2005). Types of high self-esteem and prejudice: How implicit self-esteem relates to ethnic discrimination among high explicit selfesteem individuals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(5), 693-702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271580 Kelley, A. D. (2020). Cisnormative Empathy: A Critical Examination of Love, Support, and Compassion for Transgender People by their Loved Ones. Sociological Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12390 Khalil, S., Khan, A. M. A., & Awan, A. G. (2018). A study of gender roles and identities in “The Golden Notebook” from feminist perspective. Global Journal of Management, Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(3), 705-717. A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Khan, C., & Franklin, K. (2020). Trans Studies. Companion to Women’s and Gender Studies, 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119315063.ch5 King, M. E., Winter, S., & Webster, B. (2009). “Contact reduces transprejudice: A study on attitudes towards transgenderism and transgender civil rights in Hong Kong”, International Journal of Sexual Health, Vol. 21, pp. 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317610802434609 Levitt, H. M. (2019). A psychosocial genealogy of LGBTQ+ gender: An empirically based theory of gender and gender identity cultures. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(3), 275-297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684319834641 Limpo, T., Alves, R. A., & Castro, S. L. (2010). Medir a empatia: Adaptação portuguesa do Índice de Reactividade Interpessoal. Laboratório de Psicologia, 8, 171-184. Lund, E. M., Burgess, C., & Johnson, A. J. (2020). Violence Against LGBTQ+ Persons: Research, Practice, and Advocacy. Springer Nature. Macedo, A. (2018). Identidade de Género e Orientação Sexual na Prática Clínica [Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation on Clinical Practice]. Sílabo. Miklikowska, M. (2018). Empathy trumps prejudice: The longitudinal relation between empathy and anti-immigrant attitudes in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 54(4), 703-717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dev0000474 Mildenberger, F. G. (2019). Celebrating the 150th Birthday of Magnus Hirschfeld. Sexuality & Culture, 23(1), 356-358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-018-9555-x Miller, P. R., Flores, A. R., Haider-Markel, D. P., Lewis, D. C., Tadlock, B. & Taylor, J. K. (2017). Transgender Politics as Body Politics: Effects of Disgust Sensitivity and Authoritarianism on Transgender Rights Attitudes. Politics, Groups, and Identities 5(1), 4–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2016.1260482 Miot, A. (2011). Tamanho da amostra em estudos clínicos e experimentais. Jornal Vascular Brasileiro, 10(4), 275-278. doi:10.1590/S1677-54492011000400001 Nagoshi, J. L., Adams, K. A., Terrell, H. K., Hill, E. D., Brzuzy, S., & Nagoshi, C. T. (2008). Gender differences in correlates of homophobia and transphobia. Sex Roles, 59(7–8), 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9458-7 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Norton, A. T., & Herek, G. M. (2013). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward transgender people: Findings from a national probability sample of US adults. Sex roles, 68(11-12), 738-753. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0110-6 O'Neil, J. M. (1981). Patterns of gender role conflict and strain: Sexism and fear of femininity in men's lives. The personnel and guidance journal, 60(4), 203-210. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4918.1981.tb00282.x Ostrowsky, M. K. (2010). Are violent people more likely to have low self-esteem or high selfesteem?. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 69-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.004 Pechorro, P., Marôco, J., Poiares, C., & Vieira, R. X. (2011). Validação da Escala de AutoEstima de Rosenberg com adolescentes portugueses em contexto forense e escolar. Arquivos de Medicina, 25(5-6), 174-179. Pecora, L. A., Hancock, G. I., Hooley, M., Demmer, D. H., Attwood, T., Mesibov, G. B., & Stokes, M. A. (2020). Gender identity, sexual orientation and adverse sexual experiences in autistic females. Molecular Autism, 11(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-020-00363-0 Perez-Arche, H., & Miller, D. J. (2021). What Predicts Attitudes toward Transgender and Nonbinary People? An Exploration of Gender, Authoritarianism, Social Dominance, and Gender Ideology. Sex Roles, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01212-3 Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751– 783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 Prusaczyk, E., & Hodson, G. (2019). The roles of political conservatism and binary gender beliefs in predicting prejudices toward gay men and people who are transgender. Sex Roles, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01069-1 Rosario, M., & Schrimshaw, E. W. (2014). Theories and etiologies of sexual orientation. In D. L. Tolman, L. M. Diamond, J. A. Bauermeister, W. H. George, J. G. Pfaus, & L. M. Ward (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of sexuality and psychology, Vol. 1. Person-based approaches (p. 555–596). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14193-018 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rowniak, S. (2015). Factors Related to Homophobia Among Nursing Students. Journal Of Homosexuality, 62(9), 1228-1240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2015.1037135. Silva, L. P., Junior, R. L. A., Cardoso, P., Morais, G. K., & Galvão, L. (2017). Bullying: uma revisão bibliográfica acerca da relação entre autoestima e agressividade. e-RAC, 6(1). Stryker, S. (2017). Transgender History: The Roots of Today’s Revolution. Seal Press. (original work published 2008). Sullman, M. J., Paxion, J., & Stephens, A. N. (2017). Gender roles, sex and the expression of driving anger. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 106, 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.05.016 Tas, E., Batik, M. V., & Ozturk, O. (2019). Clinical Case Study on Transsexual Identity to Lesbian Sexual Orientation Transition and the Future of the Lesbian Relationship. Konuralp Medical Journal/Konuralp Tip Dergisi, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.18521/ktd.346091 Turban, J. L., & Ehrensaft, D. (2017). Research Review: Gender identity in youth: treatment paradigms and controversies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12833 Tyler, C. P., Geldhof, G. J., Settersten Jr, R. A., & Flay, B. R. (2020). How Do Discrimination and Self-Esteem Control Beliefs Affect Prosociality? An Examination Among Black and Latinx Youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431620912486 Wachelke, J., Wolter, R., & Matos, F. (2016). Efeito do tamanho da amostra na análise de evocações para representações sociais. Liberabit, 22(2), 153-160. Walters, A. S. & Rehma, K. (2013). Avenue T: using film as entrée in teaching about transgender. Sex Education, 13:3, 33634. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2012.743460 Warriner, K., Nagoshi, C. T., & Nagoshi, J. L. (2013). Correlates of homophobia, transphobia, and internalized homophobia in gay or lesbian and heterosexual samples. Journal of Homosexuality, 60(9), 1297–1314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2013.806177 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii Whitley, B. E. (2009). Religiosity and attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A meta-analysis. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 19(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508610802471104 Willoughby, B. L., Hill, D. B., Gonzalez, C. A., Lacorazza, A., Macapagal, R. A., Barton, M. E., & Doty, N. D. (2010). Who hates gender outlaws? A multisite and multinational evaluation of the Genderism and Transphobia Scale. International Journal of Transgenderism, 12(4), 254–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2010.550821 Winter, S., Chalungsooth, P., Teh, Y. K., Rojanalert, N., Maneerat, K., Wong, Y. W., Beaumont, A., Ho, L. M. W., Gomez, F. C. & Macapagal, R. A. (2009). Transpeople, transprejudice and pathologization: a seven-country factor analytic study. International Journal of Sexual Health, 21, 96–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317610902922537 World Health Organization. (2014). Gender, women and health: What do we mean by “sex” and “gender”. Geneva (CH): WHO. Zeigler-Hill, V., & Shackelford, T. K. (2020). Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3. Zerbinati, J. P., & de Toledo Bruns, M. A. (2019). Transfobia: contextos de negatividade, violência e resistência. Revista Periódicus, 2(11), 195-216. Zucker, K. J., Lawrence, A. A., & Kreukels, B. P. (2016). Gender dysphoria in adults. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 217-247. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy021815-093034 A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii ANEXOS A STUDY ABOUT ATTITUDES TOWARD TRANS: A TRANSPARENT HATE OR A COLOURFUL LOVE? vii