Swagerty, J.B., Weese, A., Aleksandrova-Howell, M.V., Jacobs, S.C., Zamora, R.C., McCadney, A.E.
Sexual Orientation, Mindfulness, Mindfulness Practice, and Openness, Acceptance and Comfort with Diversity.
Poster presented at National Multicultural Conference and Summit (NMCS), Seattle, WA, January, 2011
Problem
Our purpose was to examine differences between self-identified non-heterosexuals (gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, other) and heterosexuals in social attitudes accepting of diversity and the relationship of these attitudes to mindfulness. Sawyerr, Strauss, and Yan (2005) found that openness to experience in diversity is related to awareness and acceptance of diversity, but that the relationship was moderated by race, age and gender. Lillis and Hayes (2007) suggested that the application of acceptance and mindfulness training may be effective in the reduction of prejudice. We previously found (Jacobs, Weese, Zamora, Howell, Swagerty, & Richards, 2010) that people whoself-reportedhaving mindfulness traininghad greatermindfulness awareness and acceptance than those without training. We also expected that those with greater awareness would be more comfortable with people different from them and have a greater relativistic appreciation of diversity.
Research questions for this poster were:
1) Is there a difference in diversity contact, comfort with differences and relativistic
appreciation of diversity or in mindfulness awareness or acceptance based on sexual orientation?
2) Does sexual orientation impact the relationship between mindfulness acceptance and the above social attitudes?
3) Do non-heterosexuals who reported having mindfulness training have greater mindfulness awareness and acceptance than those without mindfulness training?
4) Are there differences in awareness of prejudicial bias based upon sexual orientation? Does mindfulness training increase the awareness of prejudicial bias and/or willingness to engage in behaviors with diverse others for both the heterosexual and non-heterosexual samples?
Subjects and Methods
Participants were solicited via online resources such as Facebook and directed to the questionnaire on Surveymonkey.com. This was a geographically diverse sample with approximately 25 % of the 494 participants from Oklahoma and Texas, 71.5% female, 25.9 % male, and 1.2% other/multiple answers. Mean age was 26.5 (18-72 years). 72.7 % were Caucasians, 10.3% Multiracial, 5.1% African Americans, 3.6% Hispanic/Latino/a, 3.0% Asian Americans, and 2.6% Asians. 80.8% identified as heterosexuals, 4.7% as bisexuals, 4.7% as gay men, 3.0% as lesbians, and 2.4% chose “other.” Thirteen preferred not to indicate sexual orientation (excluded their data for this analysis). Over 35% had training in mindfulness with 23.3 % practicing regularly.
We used the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS; Cardaciotto, A., Herbert, J.D., Forman, E.M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V., 2008. P. 205) to measure mindfulness bi-dimensionally, Awareness and Acceptance with reliabilities of α = .829 and α = .875 respectively. Awareness is “the behavioral component of mindfulness because it involves the continuous monitoring of the totality of experience” (p 205). Acceptance is “the way in which present-moment experience is conducted: nonjudgementally, with an attitude of openness, acceptance, and even compassion towards one’s experience” (p 205). We used the Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Short Scale (M-GUDS-S; Fuertes, J.N., Miville, M. L., Mohr, J. J., Sedlacek, & Gretchen, D., 2000), which measures social attitudes, to measure Diversity of Contact (DC; α = .802), Comfort with Differences (CD; α = .854), Relativistic Appreciation of diversity (RA; α = .853), and the total S-MGUD-S scale (α = .679). Demographic questions included Ethnicity, Educational attainment, Spiritual/Religious views, Political views, and Sexual Orientation. Besides questions related to mindfulness training and practice, we modified a series of questions from Lillis and Hayes (2007) on prejudice bias awareness/acknowledgement and intentions to engage in action/behaviors related to reducing prejudice related to sexual orientation, race, and religion.
Results
Analyses were performed using PASW 17.0.
Question 1. Using independent samples t-tests, there were differences based upon sexual orientation on the S-MGUD-S total score t (376) = -3.120, p = .002, DC subscale t(392) = -4.330, p = .000, RA subscale t(387) = -3.524, p = .000, and CD subscale t(387) = 3.969, p=.000. No differences were found between the two groups on the PHLMS Acceptance and Awareness subscales. On all scales/subscales with differences, the non-heterosexual group had higher mean scores than the heterosexual group indicating higher contact with diversity and greater appreciation of difference or diversity except for the CD subscale, comfort with diversity, which was reversed.
Question 2. Mindfulness Acceptance was not related to the S-MGUDS nor to its subscales, except for CD for the heterosexual sample (p=-119, 1 tailed p= .018, N= 315). Mindfulness Awareness, as expected, was significantly related to the S-MGUDS and subscales for both the non-heterosexual and heterosexual samples. Simple regression analysis entering sexual orientation and Mindfulness Awareness predicted S-MGUDS (F [2,359] =10.013, p=.000). However, the amount of variance accounted for was quite low (4.8% and
2.5 % for Awareness alone).
Question 3. 52.1 % of the non-heterosexual sample and 67.9 % of the heterosexual sample indicated receiving training in at least one mindfulness technique. 31.5 % of the non-heterosexual sample and 21.6 % of the heterosexual sample indicated that they regularly practice mindfulness. Although mindfulness training and practice increased Mindfulness and S-MGUDS scores for the heterosexual sample, they did not for the non-heterosexual sample.
Question 4. There were no differences based on sexual orientation on the personal awareness and acknowledgement of prejudicial bias questions, however there were differences on several questions indicating intention to engage in experiences/actions to increase contact with diverse others and thus likely reduce prejudice. These items were endorsed more frequently by the non-heterosexual sample. Mindfulness practice increased awareness of personal biases regardless of sexual orientation and also increased endorsement of items that indicated intention to engage in experiences/actions which would increase contact with diverse others.
Conclusion
Our findings, although limited by participant self-selection and self-report questionnaires, offer support for additional research in the area of mindfulness, mindfulness training, and openness to and acceptance of diverse others. In the poster, we will present in more detail our findings on the relationship between mindfulness awareness training and prejudice bias awareness and behaviors which may reduce prejudice. We will discuss implications for mindfulness interventions for both heterosexuals and non-heterosexuals to possibly increase acceptance, openness, and exposure to diversity and possibly reduce prejudice. Future research may explore mindfulness techniques to increase awareness and acceptance of diverse/ marginalized groups; such interventions may increase positive attitudes towards these groups as Smith et. al., (2009) suggested.