Measure of Sexual Identity Exploration Commitment (MoSIEC; Worthington, Savoy, Dillon, & Vernaglia, 2002 ).
Convergent validity was assessed directly in Study 3 ( N545) by comparing LGB-KASH scores with measures
assessing attitudes toward gay men and lesbians (assessed using the ATG and ATL subscales of the ATLG;
Herek, 1994 ) and bisexuals (ARBS; Mohr & Rochlen, 1999 ). Correlations of the LGB-KASH subscales with the
ATG ranged from .27 to .89 and with the ATL from .38 to .82. In both cases, the highest correlations emerged in
relation to the LGB Civil Rights factor. Correlations between the LGB-KASH components and the four subscales
of the ARBS ranged from .02 to .74. Here, the strongest correlations emerged between LGB Civil Rights scores
and both the male and female Tolerance subscales of the ARBS ( Worthington et al., 2005 ).
Divergent/Discriminant
The discriminant validity of the LGB-KASH was assessed by comparing the scores of LGB individuals with
those of heterosexuals. Group differences were found on all five subscales, with LGB participants showing stron-
ger endorsement of Internalized Affirmativeness, LGB Civil Rights, and Knowledge than heterosexuals, but less
endorsement of Hate and Religious Conflict. The impression management subscale of the BIDR ( Paulhus & Reid,
1991) correlated negatively with measures of Hate ( r5/C0.12) and Internalized Affirmativeness ( r5/C0.12;
Worthington et al., 2005 , Study 1).
Construct/Factor Analytic
Worthington et al. (2005) began their scale validation with a pool of 60 items. Of these, 18 items were elimi-
nated due to low item-to-total correlations. Exploratory principal-axis factor analysis with oblique rotation was
then conducted on the intercorrelations of the remaining 42 items. A 5-factor solution was deemed most
interpretable ( Worthington et al., 2005 ). After the removal of items with low communalities and high cross-
loadings, 28 items remained comprising the following subscales: Hate (6 items), Knowledge of LGB History,
Symbols, and Community (5 items), LGB Civil Rights (5 items), Religious Conflict (7 items), and Internalized
Affirmativeness (5 items; Worthington et al., 2005 ). Subscale intercorrelations (Study 1) were moderate to high
(ranging from .27 to .64) with the strongest correlation emerging between the Civil Rights and Internalized
Affirmativeness ( r5.64). Confirmatory factor analysis in Study 2 ( Worthington et al., 2005 ) suggested that the 5-
factor model provided an adequate fit to the data (GFI 5.84).
Criterion/Predictive
The predictive validity of the LGB-KASH remains to be assessed.
Location
Worthington, R.L., Dillon, F.R., & Becker-Schutte, A.M. (2005). Development, reliability, and validity of the
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Knowledge and Attitudes Scale for Heterosexuals (LGB-KASH). Journal of Counseling
Psychology ,52, 104.
Results and Comments
The LGB-KASH was developed with the goal of broadening the scope of attitudes assessed beyond a unidi-
mensional conception of homophobia as ranging from condemnation to tolerance (e.g., Herek, 1988 ). Items asses-
sing affirmation and knowledge, rather than simply a lack of condemnation, are therefore included. Indeed, this
scale is unique in its assessment of positivity and knowledge as well as in its assessment of attitudes toward gay
men, lesbians, and bisexuals as a superordinate group. As such, this scale does not allow for the differentiation
of attitudes toward specific groups and thus should be utilized only where attitudes toward and knowledge of
LGB individuals in general is the construct of interest.
LGB-KASH SAMPLE ITEMS
Factor 1: Hate
1.LGB people deserve the hatred they receive.
2.I sometimes think about being violent toward LGB
people.Factor 2: Knowledge of LGB History,
Symbols, and Community
3.I am knowledgeable about the significance of the
Stonewall Riot to the Gay Liberation Movement.
4.I feel qualified to educate others about how to be
affirmative regarding LGB issues.735 MEASURES OF ANTI-LGB BIAS
VI. SOCIOCULTURAL INTERACTION AND CONFLICT