Personality Traits, Ideology, and Attitudes Toward LGBT People: A Scoping Review

ABSTRACT

This scoping review investigates the existing literature regarding personality traits, ideology, gender roles, and attitudes toward LGBT people. The review was conducted through PubMed and Web of Science databases. After establishing inclusion- and exclusion criteria, 12 studies published between 2013 and 2023 were reviewed, three themes (personality traits, gender roles and differences, and political ideology) were identified through thematic analysis. Several of the studies reported a relation between the personality traits Openness to Experience, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, and homo- and transnegative attitudes. In particular, lower levels of Agreeableness, high levels of Conscientiousness, and lower levels of Extraversion were related to prejudice. The Dark Triad, especially the antagonistic traits Psychopathy and Machiavellianism, had a strong association with homo- and transnegativity. Multiple studies showed a connection between negative attitudes and ideological views. Especially right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) were strong predictors of negative attitudes toward LGBT people. The majority of the studies also reported a significant gender difference in attitudes, with men being more prone to exhibit prejudice toward LGBT people than women. There are practical implications of this review relating to interventions which may target the prevention of homo and trans-negative attitudes, promoting inclusion and integration.

KEYWORDS:

• Dark triad
• homonegativity
• LGBT
• personality traits
• right wing authoritarianism
• social dominance orientation
• transnegativity

LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) people have long been discriminated against internationally (Human Rights Council, 2011). Despite positive developments, such as the depathologization of being transgender and the legalization of same-sex marriage in an increasing number of countries, there is still a long way before global equality for people with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities is achieved. LGBT people experience stigma, discrimination, and harassment, which can have a severe impact on well-being and mental health. Therefore, it is crucial to better understand how negative attitudes toward LGBT people are shaped in today’s society and whether personality traits are related to such attitudes, either directly or through other variables such as gender roles or ideological views.

Although more inclusive forms of the acronym relating to gender and sexual minorities have been increasingly used, involving intersex, queer and asexual people (LGBTQIA+), the acronym LGBT will be utilized in this review. This is due to the study’s focus being homo- and trans negativity as it has been studied with LGBT populations, without an explicit inclusion of other gender and sexual minorities. Homophobia and transphobia have been two of the most used terms reflecting prejudice and discriminatory behavior toward LGBT people. The term homophobia was first introduced in 1972 by George Weinberg and was defined as “The dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals” (Weinberg, 2010, p. 4). Even though homophobia and transphobia are closely related (Nagoshi et al., 2008), the definition differs; “Emotional disgust toward individuals who do not conform to society´s gender expectations” (Hill & Willoughby, 2005, p. 533). Using the term “phobia” can be misleading due to the fact that individuals with homo- and transphobia do not necessarily have an intense fear that underlies these attitudes but more toward anger, hostility, and disgust (Herek, 2015). Therefore, the use of other terms, like homo- and transnegativity, and heterosexism, can better encompass the different levels of negative attitudes toward LGBT people. Consequently, one may argue that what underlies these attitudes cannot be explained as being a phobia but a prejudicial attitude, and homo- and transprejudice may therefore be a better term to use (Logan, 1996). Similar to several of the included studies, this review will utilize the terms homonegativity and transnegativity when referring to negative attitudes toward LGBT people.

Homo- and transnegative attitudes, discrimination, and stigma can impact LGBT people’s participation in society, in areas of life such as work, housing, and health care, which relate to fundamental human rights and their infringement (Flores, 2021). For LGBT people, the rate of discrimination is significantly higher compared to non-LGBT individuals, as they still face harassment, legal and societal discrimination and exclusion, violence, and sometimes death (Human Rights Campaign, n.d.) According to the minority stress model (Frost & Meyer, 2009), the consequence of prejudice and discrimination toward individuals identifying as LGBT can lead to them developing heightened fear and negative expectations of how society will treat them. A report from the Center for American Progress shows that one in four LGBT people experience discrimination (Singh & Durso, 2017). 64% of LGBT people have experienced anti-LGBT violence, and many have experienced verbal, physical, and sexual abuse (Hubbard, 2021). Studies have shown that gender and sexual minorities have an increased risk of developing depression, anxiety, and suicidality (Flores, 2021). This illustrates how negative attitudes and discrimination can have a substantial effect on the physical and mental wellbeing of LGBT people.

On the other hand, there has been a global positive shift of acceptance toward LGBT people. Many countries have legalized same sex marriage and are working toward a more trans-positive society (Equaldex, 2023). Despite this, many countries still exhibit a negative attitude toward the LGBT community, and several countries have experienced a decline in their acceptance (Flores, 2021). At least 67 countries have criminalized same-sex relations between consenting adults, for instance Uganda and Iran, and at least 9 countries have laws that criminalize forms of gender expression that target transgender people, such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (Human Rights Watch, n.d.). This shows that there is still much work to be done to better the situation for the LGBT community.

As the need to understand factors that may underlie negative attitudes and prejudice toward LGBT people is of importance, there has been a growing interest toward especially ideological and personality factors which seemingly predict homo- and transnegativity. The most prominent factors that have been shown over time are factors regarding personality traits, gender roles, and ideological orientations such as religious and political views (Goodman & Moradi, 2008).

When examining ideological factors as contributors to explain negative attitudes toward LGBT people, two measures are of particular relevance: right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and social dominance orientation (SDO). Right-wing authoritarians, as defined by Altemeyer (1981), are individuals characterized by being highly egocentric, favoring traditional values and conventionalism and are generally more submissive to authority figures. In addition, individuals within this ideology can be expected to act aggressively toward outgroups (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Research has shown that RWA is negatively correlated with Openness and positively with Conscientiousness and Extraversion (Ekehammar et al., 2004). Several studies have shown that RWA is an important predictor of prejudice and negative attitudes toward outgroups, including LGBT people (Ekehammar et al., 2004; Goodman & Moradi, 2008). This can be explained by the fact that LGBT people have been disapproved of in many religious communities and governments, they are perceived as confronting traditional social conventions (Goodman & Moradi, 2008).

On the other hand, SDO, a measure based on Social Dominance Theory stating that groups and societies are organized into hierarchies of dominance, measures the extent of how much an individual accepts group-based dominance (Nicol, 2007). Similar to RWA, SDO works as a predictor of prejudice, as groups are perceived as being lower in the hierarchy and having an inferior status in society (Duckitt, 2006). Meaning, those scoring highly in SDO will likely deem minority groups such as LGBT people as “lesser,” thus leading to homo- and transnegative attitudes.

Religion is another concept closely related to ideological factors, with an emphasis on conservative orientations. Studies have shown that religion may work as a predictor of negative attitudes toward LGBT people (Kanamori & Xu, 2022; Rosik et al., 2007). Higher levels of religiosity have been shown to be associated with a higher degree of prejudice toward LGBT people (Finlay & Walther, 2003). As a conservative religious orientation and RWA both involve traditionalism, obedience, and submission, it can be argued they are both associated with negative attitudes in a similar manner.

Furthermore, studies have shown that on average, men tend to express more negative attitudes toward LGBT people compared to women (Cotton-Huston & Waite, 2000; Nagoshi et al., 2008). The cause of this gender difference may have various explanations. One potential explanation lies with the social construct of masculinity. Traditional masculinity is often associated with toughness, aggression, and dominance, and this may lead to men perceiving LGBT people as a threat to their own masculinity or power (Theodore & Basow, 2000). This resembles much of what is known as machismo, a culturally shaped and maintained belief in Latinx groups, consisting of both hypermasculine characteristics and familial responsibility (Hirai et al., 2014). Such beliefs may result in discomfort and hostility toward those who do not conform to traditional gender roles (Goodman & Moradi, 2008). This may also be connected to the fact that young men are often socialized to be more tough and competitive, while young women are encouraged to be nurturing and empathetic. This can result in different attitudes toward LGBT people, with men being more likely to view it as deviant or abnormal. However, no single factor seems to be the cause of this gender difference; rather, it is a combined result of gender norms, socialization, and cultural beliefs.

When examining the association between personality traits and attitudes, two models of personality are commonly utilized: the Five-Factor Model and the Dark Triad. As postulated by Costa and McCrea (1999), the five-factor model aims to explain that individuals can be characterized by traits, which can be explained as enduring patterns of thoughts, actions, and feelings. These traits are somewhat consistent across situations and cultures. Traits are of interest in the field of personality psychology, as they can help explain certain individual differences. The traits are organized hierarchically, from broad to narrower. The broad components at the top of the hierarchy are Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Neuroticism is most commonly related to depression and pessimistic attitudes. Extroversion is mostly about a preference for social stimulation and having social skills. Openness to experience concerns a need for a variety of diverse interests, and Agreeableness regards compliance and having a forgiving attitude. Lastly, Conscientiousness is characterized by striving toward achievement and having leadership skills (Costa & McCrea, 1999, pp. 139–143).

The Dark Triad is a model consisting of three antagonistic, maladaptive personality traits (Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and Narcissism) and how they can impact behavior (Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Machiavellianism is characterized by cynicism and manipulative behavior, while Psychopathy involves high impulsivity, antisociality, and low levels of neuroticism and empathy (Monaghan et al., 2016; Paulhus & Williams, 2002). Lastly, Narcissism relates to a sense of superiority, grandiosity and exploitativeness (Jones & Paulhus, 2014). All three of them reflect antisocial traits, and people high in the Dark Triad personality traits are more prone to unstable emotional states and low levels of emotional arousal (Li et al., 2022). Buckels et al. (2013) have also proposed expanding the Dark Triad into the Dark Tetrad. The fourth trait, Everyday Sadism, refers to enjoying cruelty at a subclinical scale. People with these “dark” traits are also reportedly more likely to express homo- and transnegative attitudes (Kay & Dimakis, 2022).

Aim of the study

Although the abovementioned concepts (personality traits, ideological factors, and gender differences) have been well studied in relation to attitudes toward LGBT people, to our knowledge there has been no review capitalizing on the existing knowledge and specifically highlighting the interaction of these factors. Thus, potential underlying mechanisms may have been missed. Additionally, being able to identify groups that tend to have more negative attitudes toward LGBT people may have a significant value in developing interventions targeting these groups. The impact of these interventions may lead to these individuals expressing less prejudice and discrimination, which in turn can result in improved quality of life for LGBT people. This scoping review addresses the following main questions:

1. What is known in existing literature regarding the correlation between personality traits and attitudes toward gender- and sexual minorities?

2. According to existing literature, how do factors such as political ideology and gender differences influence the aforementioned correlations?

Method

According to Mays, Roberts, and Popay (2001, p.194, cited in Arksey & O’Malley, 2005), a scoping review aims “to map rapidly the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available, and can be undertaken as stand‐alone projects in their own right, especially where an area is complex or has not been reviewed comprehensively before.” In other words, this definition proposes that a scoping review aims to provide an overview of a research area, rather than producing an answer to a particular question.

Arksey and O’Malley (2005) propose four different purposes of a scoping study that apply in the field that our review pertains. First, this review explores the research activity regarding personality traits, ideological views, and attitudes toward gender- and sexual minorities. This can be seen in relation to mapping current evidence of what these attitudes may be influenced by. Second, this scoping review may act as a precursor to full systematic reviews in the fields of psychology, sociology, gender studies and political science. One may argue that a full systematic review would be valuable and highly relevant which can be seen in relation to above-mentioned studies highlighting that negative attitudes toward LGBT people substantially impact the mental and physical wellbeing of LGBT people (Flores, 2021; Hubbard, 2021; Singh & Durso, 2017). Third, the findings on the abovementioned themes are summarized, holding a practical value for stakeholders involved in healthcare, legislation, and research in gender- and sexuality studies. In extension of this, it may be argued that a practical value may be related to generating awareness about factors influencing these attitudes, furthermore reducing barriers against engagement in policy making and consequently may reduce inequality. Overall, our aim is to provide a map of evidence related to attitudes toward LGBT population groups and personality traits, looking further into ideological factors and gender differences. Such a review can be used to explore the research activity of a given theme.

In this scoping review, the aim is to explore research studies relevant to the correlation between personality traits and attitudes toward LGBT people. For our review, Web of Science and PubMed were selected as primary databases. PubMed focuses mainly on biomedical science, and Web of Science covers most scientific fields. Next, key concepts were determined and search terms that were relevant to our theme were developed (see Table 1). To further narrow the number of studies, a series of inclusion- and exclusion criteria were established (see Table 2). The search provided 12 studies that met all the presented criteria. The procedure of the selection process is shown in its entirety in Figure 1, developed following the PRISMA guidelines.

Figure 1. Flow Diagram of the Selection Process.

Note. Adapted from Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyzes: the PRISMA statement. PLoS medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.

Table 1. Search terms in PubMed and web of science.

Search query
“personality trait*“
AND
(attitude* OR prejudice)
AND
(homophobi* OR transphobi* OR homonegativ*) OR (LGBT*) OR (gay OR lesbian OR trans*)

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
Articles published between 2013 and February 2023	Other dates
English or Norwegian	Other languages
Discoverable through Web of Science or PubMed	Other databases
Focus on negative attitudes toward sexual orientation and gender identity	Other perspectives
Peer reviewed articles	Grey literature

Next, the collected data was aligned, as relevant information and variables of interest within each study was identified and highlighted. Furthermore, each study’s publishing year, authors, study location, research paradigm, findings, participants, and implications were plotted. This process provided a summary of the findings, of which the analysis builds upon. Table 3 shows a brief overview of all the studies included, while Figure 2 shows the studies per the nationality of their research participants, showing that a majority of the included studies used a sample from USA or Italy. Lastly, Figure 3 shows the studies by when they were published, highlighting that a majority of the studies were written in more recent years.

Figure 2. Included Studies by Nationality of Research Participants.

Note. While S12 was conducted in Australia, research participants from the USA were utilized. All other studies used participants from their respective countries of publishing.

Figure 3. Included Studies by Year of Publishing.

Table 3. Overview of the included studies.

Study Number	Authors	Year	Country	Participants
S1	Sanchez-Fuentes, M.D., Parra-Barrera, S.M., de Araujo, L.F., Monteiro, R.P.	2022	Colombia	N = 521, mean age range = 27,39, 36,3% male & 63,7% female
S2	Anzani, A., Di Sarno, M., Sacchi, S., Prunas, A.	2018	Italy	N = 165, mean age range = 24,32, 29,7% male, 70,3% female
S3	Carrera-Fernandez, M.V., Lameiras-Fernandez, M., Rodriguez-Castro, Y., Vallejo-Medina, P.	2013	Spain	N = 1500, mean age range = 14,19, 50,7% male, 49,3%
S4	Hirai, M., Winkel, M.H., Popan, J.R.	2014	USA	N = 330, 16% male with mean age range = 24,5, 84% female with mean age range = 22,6
S5	Falgares, G., Manna, G., Constanzo, G., De Santis, S., Kopala-Sibley, D.C., Ingoglia, S.	2022	Italy	N = 307, mean age range = 28,74, 46% male, 54% female
S6	Metin-Orta, I., Metin-Camgoz, S.	2020	Turkey	N = 345, mean age range = 22,6, 33,6% male, 66,4% female
S7	D’Urso, G., Maynard, A., Petruccelli, I., Di Domenico, A., Fasolo, M.	2023	Italy	N = 551, mean age range = 46,2, 24% male, 76% female
S8	Kay, C.S., Dimakis, S.	2022	USA	Study 1: N = 709, mean age range = 19,66, 36,7% male, 63,3% female Study 2: N = 267, mean age range = 39,65, 57,7% male, 42,3% female
S9	Cabrera, C., Duenas, J.M., Cosi, S., Morales-Vives, F.	2022	Spain	N = 479, mean age range = 15,04, 50,1% male, 49,9% female
S10	Clements, Z.A., Munro, G.D.	2021	USA	N = 260, mean age range = 22, 18,8% male, 80% female, 0,4% other
S11	Wang, C.-H., Lin, T.-J., Weng, D. L.-C., Chang, Y.-B.	2020	Taiwan	N = 1188, above age 20
S12	Moor, L., Kapelles, T., Koc, Y., Anderson, J.	2019	Australia	N = 208, mean age range = 39,15, 48,1% male, 51,9% female

Results

In this scoping review, 12 studies published between 2013 and 2023 were included. As shown in Figure 3, only one article was published in the years 2013, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2023. Two studies were published in 2020, as well as four studies from 2022. Most of the studies in this scoping review were published after the year 2019. All of the studies used a quantitative approach, and the studies were conducted in seven countries, as highlighted in Figure 2. In particular, three studies were conducted in the United States, three were conducted in Italy, two in Spain, one in Colombia, one in Taiwan and one in Australia with an American sample. All of the studies included male and female participants between 12 and 71 years of age. Study participants were mainly high school and university students, followed by the general public, and secondary school teachers. Different measurements were used to study personality traits. Seven studies used questionnaires and inventories that were based on the Big Five Factors of personality, namely Openness to Experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism. Two studies used questionnaires based on the Dark Triad. Another publication focused on maladaptive personality traits while the last study used questionnaires concerning expressive gender traits.

The findings are reported under three themes which were identified: (1) personality traits, including the Big Five factors of personality and the Dark Triad, (2) ideology, as reflected through RWA and SDO, and (3) gender roles and related differences. An overview of the identified themes is provided in Table 4.

Table 4. Overview of emerging themes in the included articles.

Emerging Themes	Relevant Articles
Personality traits	S1, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S10, S11, S12
Gender roles and attitudes	S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S9
Ideological perspectives	S2, S5, S11, S12

Personality traits

Several studies reported an association between negative attitudes toward LGBT people and the following personality traits Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Some studies found that lower levels of Openness to Experience were related to negative attitudes or prejudice toward LGBT people (S1, S5, S6, S9). Regarding Agreeableness, four studies reported that lower levels of this trait were associated with negative attitudes or prejudice (S1, S4, S5, S9). Furthermore, S7 found that lower levels of Agreeableness combined with higher levels of Conscientiousness and lower levels of Extraversion were associated with blatant prejudice. Whereas multiple studies showed equivalent results, the study conducted in Taiwan revealed contradicting results, reporting an association between higher levels of Openness to Experience and decreased support for same-sex marriage among older people (S11). The same study also found a connection between higher levels of Agreeableness and decreased support for same-sex marriage. In addition, a higher level of Conscientiousness was linked to decreased support for same-sex marriage among older people (S11).

Two studies focused on traits within the Dark Triad (S8) and Tetrad (S12). S8 found an association between the measured traits and both homo- and transnegative attitudes. However, while S12 found an association between the traits within the Dark Triad and explicit attitudes toward gay men, they did not report similar findings on Everyday Sadism within the Dark Tetrad. Furthermore, none of the measured variables were able to predict implicit attitudes. S10 also included a measure of Narcissism in their study, associating this and a participant’s negative view on transgender bathroom use.

Gender roles and differences

Furthermore, a multitude of the reviewed literature showed that male participants reported more negative attitudes than their female peers (S2, S3, S4, S5, S6 and S9). In addition, S4 focused on the impact of traditional masculinity in the form of Machismo, and S3 focused on the impact of traditionally gendered personality traits. Both studies associated belief in, or possession of, traditional masculinity and increased homonegative attitudes.

Ideology

Multiple studies revealed a connection between attitudes toward LGBT people and political and religious views. S5 reported a positive association between participants’ scores in RWA and homonegative attitudes, which is further supported by another study (S12). S12 also reported similar findings regarding participants’ SDO-scores, though with a smaller effect. A similar association was also found between homonegative attitudes and reported religiosity, where those who reported a religious view (S11) or high degree of religious beliefs (S5) also reported more negative attitudes. S2 found similar associations between both religion and RWA when looking at transnegative attitudes.

Discussion

Personality traits

The results shed light on how personality, to some extent, can explain individual differences in attitudes toward LGBT people. As it appears in the results, people scoring low on Openness to Experience exhibit more negative attitudes toward LGBT people (S1, S5, S6, S9). This finding is consistent with previous research indicating that prejudices are significantly associated with low scores on Openness to Experience (Akrami et al., 2011; Ekehammar & Akrami, 2003, as cited in S9). A low score on Openness to Experience may be associated with conservative views, traditional gender perceptions, and less cognitive flexibility, which in turn may lead to a narrower understanding of sexual orientation and gender identity (Cramer et al., 2013). This understanding may result in feelings of discomfort as well as hostility toward LGBT people. The association highlights the importance of challenging the understanding of sexual orientation and gender identity, which may lead to a broader understanding, higher inclusion, and more acceptance of LGBT people.

One factor that might influence the relationship between Openness to Experience and negative attitudes is political viewpoints. Cramer et al. (2013) propose that favoring RWA might mediate the relationship between Openness to Experience and prejudice. The study emphasizes that the personality trait influences prejudices indirectly through general world beliefs, which may result in more conservative viewpoints. Further, it highlights that a low score on Openness to Experience reflects cognitive closure and lower cognitive flexibility, which could drive attitudinal-ideological patterns in a similar direction. Scoring low on Openness to Experience may predispose individuals to support a more right-winged ideology that holds rigid gender beliefs. In such a way, we might thus expect more negative attitudes and prejudice toward LGBT people.

Further, the findings of the studies show that Agreeableness may influence individual attitudes toward LGBT people. Studies conducted in Colombia (S1), Italy (S5), USA (S4), and Spain (S9) mainly show that lower levels of Agreeableness were related to increased homo- and transnegativity. In contrast, one study conducted in Taiwan (S11) found that higher levels of Agreeableness were similarly associated. An explanation behind this contrast might be different ideologies and their impact. The main findings align with previous research indicating that lower levels of Agreeableness are related to common prejudice (Akrami et al., 2011; Ekehammar & Akrami, 2003, cited in S9). An individual scoring low on the Agreeableness index tends to be less considerate, compassionate, sympathetic, and cooperative (S11). In other words, these characteristics might reflect a less tolerant attitude toward minority groups.

The association between higher levels of Agreeableness and decreased support for same-sex marriage may be influenced by different political and religious factors. Countries impacted by political conservatism might drive citizens to be more agreeable toward the direction of negative attitudes toward LGBT people. S5 found that homonegativity correlated negatively with agreeableness, and positively with RWA and religiosity. This finding suggests that RWA and religiosity might be factors influencing the relationship between Agreeableness and prejudice as these factors reflect more rigid beliefs regarding sexual orientation and gender identity.

The results also showed that the Dark Triad was positively associated with homo- and transnegativity. S8 proposed that Psychopathy and Machiavellianism had strong associations with gender bashing, homo-, and transnegativity, while Narcissism was moderately connected to the same negative attitudes. S9 found similar results highlighting the association between Narcissism and transnegativity. As Psychopathy constitutes a lesser sense of empathy, one might assume that attitudes are formed with little consideration toward the wellbeing of others. Additionally, the findings might relate to previous correlations, as individuals scoring highly in Narcissism are more likely to possess RWA beliefs, as reflected by S12. Furthermore, S12 postulates the lack of association between Everyday Sadism within the Dark Tetrad and homonegative attitudes, suggesting that negative attitudes do not come from a wish to harm or cause suffering to LGBT people, but rather as an outcome of other factors.

Gender roles and differences

Our study indicates that there are significant gender differences in the attitudes toward LGBT people, specifically regarding men’s attitudes. Several studies indicate that men tend to be more homo- and transnegative than women. S6 hypothesizes that this may be attributed to the fact that heterosexual women, compared to heterosexual men, have, on average, a higher amount of prior interaction with gay men. This may in turn increase their salience and knowledge about them, thereby decreasing stereotypical beliefs. Prior interactions are associated with more positive attitudes in S6. This association aligns with findings in another study (Liang & Alimo, 2005), which argues that while gender may have a direct effect on attitudes toward LGBT people, a stronger indirect effect is found through women having an increased amount of contact. It should however be emphasized that this contact must be meaningful to effectively reduce negative attitudes and behaviors; meaning simply occupying the same space is not sufficient (Tropp et al., 2022).

The results in S3 further argued that those who scored high in Machismo were expected to show prejudice toward mainly gay men but also, marginally, gay women. This further highlights that attitudes are not only influenced by gender alone but also by a belief in traditional gender roles.

Individuals embodying forms of heteronormative masculinity perceive especially gay men as more feminine than heterosexual men, in turn affecting the perception of their sexual orientation. Slurs and phrases directed toward gay men are often used as a form of social regulation and reflect the perception of how the society in question views homosexuality, while also reflecting the heterosexist ideal of perceiving heterosexual masculinity as the “most natural gender” (Thepsourinthone et al., 2022). Additionally, while gay men may be viewed as less masculine by heterosexual men, to a degree that they are viewed as more similar to heterosexual women, this effect was not found among female respondents, which Blashill and Powlishta (2009) argued was likely due to women’s tendency to have more flexible gender stereotypes than men. However, Ciaffoni et al. (2024) argue that some gender differences occur due to intra-minority solidarity, as an association has been found between women’s sense of gender inequality and their attitudes toward LGBT people. In other words, their attitudes may be more positive as similarities are seen between women’s and LGBT people’s treatment in a patriarchal societal structure.

To further emphasize masculinity’s role in attitudes toward LGBT people, Blashill and Powlishta (2009) discuss how gay women are viewed as both more masculine, and a more heterogeneous group, when compared to gay men. This may be attributed to the fact that gay women may not be perceived as violating gender-typical norms to the same extent as gay men are, therefore not being as much of a target, despite both groups being seen as gender atypical and in possession of non-traditional gender roles.

Later studies support the work of Kite and Whitley (1998), showing that men are more likely to maintain more negative attitudes toward gay men, than women. These negative attitudes are part of a larger construct regarding traditional gender roles and are associated with male sexuality and toughness. Men are in general encouraged by society to execute and uphold more traditional views about gender roles, compared to women (Davies, 2004; Kite & Whitley, 1998).

Similar to our findings of heterosexual men being more prejudiced toward especially gay men, comparable tendencies were also found toward transgender people. Findings in S2 show that heterosexual men expressed more negative attitudes toward transgender people, which is thought to be explained by men potentially perceiving transgender people as a threat to their dominant social role. Similar results were found in S9, which showed that men scored significantly higher on transnegativity and gender bashing. A study indicate that some subgroups within the transgender community receive more bias than others, especially regarding transgender women (male-to-female), who may experience motivated actions like assaults and homicide (Wang-Jones et al., 2017). In addition, trans-women and trans-non-binary people often experience harassment at a higher rate than cis-LGB people (Devís-Devís et al., 2022).

Our findings align further with Nagoshi et al. (2008), further showing that men report more negative attitudes toward transgender people. Research on the causes of such negative attitudes suggests that it may be supported by the desire to maintain traditional gender beliefs. In addition, a potential reason why heterosexual men hold more negative attitudes may be as this serves to validate claims to a normative masculinity (Riggs & Sion, 2017).

Ideology

In addition to gender and gender roles being related to negative attitudes toward LGBT people, our results also indicate that the ideological background has a significant predictive role. As S2 and S5 state, RWA correlates with negative attitudes, with S5 stating RWA as the strongest predictor of negative attitudes toward LGBT people. In addition, the results from this study show that homonegativity correlates positively with political conservatism. These results are in line with the fact that RWA works as a possible predictor, as RWA upholds traditional gender beliefs, while also adhering to religious and political beliefs about LGBT people (Davies, 2004; Kite & Whitley, 1998). As several of the included studies were conducted in countries characterized by conservative ideologies, which in turn might partly explain the results presented in this review. This further supports the idea that conservative authoritarianism may have an influence in shaping negative attitudes toward LGBT people.

Results from our study also indicate the possible role of SDO in shaping attitudes toward LGBT people, as S12 found that RWA and SDO were significantly correlated with each other and predicted explicit anti-gay attitudes. Individuals scoring high on both RWA and SDO measures seek to diminish outgroups, where the diminishing of such atypical groups play a role in homonegativity (Davies, 2004). According to Konopka et al. (2020), individuals scoring high on RWA maintain a traditional view of social order and are perhaps more opposed to factors which challenge this view. Additionally, higher degrees of SDO may lead to an individual preferring their group to be superior to others, while transgender individuals may be perceived as breaking the traditional view of gender, therefore being perceived as threatening. The study also showed that beliefs about gender being biologically constructed lead to more transnegative attitudes, further supporting our findings (Konopka et al., 2020).

Relations between trans- and homonegativity

Konopka et al. (2020) further demonstrated that prejudice toward gay men and women predicted transnegative attitudes, where particularly men with homonegative attitudes also showed more prejudice toward transgender people. This is further supported by findings in S8, where all measurements of homo- and transnegativity were significantly correlated with each other. Furthermore, both trans- and homonegative attitudes have been shown to be predicted by rigid gender beliefs and SDO (Loo, 2016, as cited in S2; S12), as well as RWA (S2, S5, S12). This suggests that homo- and transnegativity might be directly correlated or are influenced by similar underlying variables.

According to Dierckx et al. (2017) the population that expresses the most negative attitudes are mainly men, older people, heterosexual people, and those with a religious background or in a less diverse social environment. Their findings also showed that amongst men, the individual´s perception of their own masculinity or gender identity, combined with more prominent masculine behavior, had a significant, negative impact on their attitudes. The article argues that the negative attitudes amongst men could originate from the desire to deny those who challenge traditional gender roles, because they fear such a violation might undermine the “male social dominance.” Regarding women, the negative attitudes appear to stem from conservative beliefs, rather than gender beliefs (Dierckx et al., 2017). This supports the idea that the tendency of men having more homo- and transnegative attitudes relates to heteronormative masculinity and how male gender roles are defined.

Limitations

While these findings are of importance, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of this scoping review. By choosing to have “LGBT” as the key term when reviewing the literature, this review also potentially excludes other sexual orientations, gender identities or groups of people with diverse sex characteristics, such as intersex people. This means that other significant aspects of this diverse community have not explicitly been included, both in the included studies and the work that followed. Despite this, as similar factors seem to predict homo- and transnegativity, similar assumptions may possibly be used to assess attitudes toward other sexual orientations and gender identities. In addition, by excluding studies published before 2013, as well as studies published after our literary search in February 2023, important studies and studies may have been excluded, further possibly limiting our findings. Lastly, conducting a more rigorous systematic evaluation of the studies may be needed to further examine existing literature, and explore the findings postulated in this scoping review.

Conclusion

The literature in this review suggests that personality traits alone cannot predict homonegative or transnegative attitudes. Yet they are contributing to people leaning toward different ideological and political directions that in turn shape policies and predict discriminatory behaviors toward LGBT people. Findings in this scoping review reveal that personality traits, specifically Openness to experience and Agreeableness, can provide some explanatory power for homo- and transnegative attitudes. This review also suggests that ideological beliefs may serve as a mediator in this relationship. A low score on Openness to Experience or Agreeableness seem to be possible predisposing factors influencing individuals to hold certain ideological beliefs, like RWA, that in turn impact policies that have real-world social, political, and mental health implications for LGBT people. Furthermore, The Dark Triad also had strong associations with gender bashing, homo- and transnegativity.

These findings demonstrate that homo- and transnegative attitudes have similar origins. Having this in mind may be useful for developing interventions to combat discrimination against LGBT people. Interventions in school and college settings should focus on reeducating individuals toward a perception which cultivates gender-inclusion and increases awareness of human-rights-based approaches. Moreover, interventions should further advocate a more inclusive definition of masculinity as a social construct, in order to reduce homo- and transnegative attitudes. Promoting meaningful contact with LGBT people has proven useful in increasing tolerance and decreasing prejudice. In that direction, a collaborative approach between academic institutions, civil society, and LGBT-led organizations, as well as other stakeholders, could prove effective and empowering toward involved parties. Furthermore, our results also suggest that interventions directly targeting people in the RWA belief systems may be effective to reduce prejudices.

Acknowledgments

We would like to extend our acknowledgments to Associate Professor Hege Høivik Bye for her helpful input throughout the process.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.