Research (Part I)

In my search each morning to find trans topic to write these two studies caught my attention.

I think many of you have heard of this study but this article has a little bit more data about the study.

Fraudulent study on transgender prejudice is successfully replicated
It turns out that if you actually gather the data, you get the same result.
Ars Technica
By Roheeni Saxena
April 15, 2016

In 2015, a study was published that claimed that reducing prejudice against homosexual people was relatively easy. All it took was a brief conversation with a stranger who was going door to door talking about prejudice against homosexuals. Supposedly, participants’ attitudes remained changed up to three months after said conversation.

The study received widespread media coverage and was considered groundbreaking because we knew so little about how to reduce prejudice. Unfortunately, it turned out to be built largely on fraudulent data, and the study was retracted.

Ironically, the researcher who uncovered the fraudulent data in this first canvassing study, David Broockman, has now published his own study on the same issue. It demonstrates that canvassing actually does change participants’ attitudes toward transgender individuals and that this change in attitudes persists for at least three months.

I think empirically we all knew that one on one discussion does make a difference, it is like Harvey Milk that by coming out we can change how people think about us.

The article then goes on to talk about methodology of the current study,

In the study, participants were randomized to receive a canvasser who would talk to them about either transgender prejudice (the experimental condition) or about recycling (the control condition). The canvassers who talked about prejudice used a scripted conversation that asked participants to recall a time when they were judged negatively, to help them empathize with transgender people who experience prejudice. This technique is known as “analogic perspective-taking.”

In addition, Broockman and Kalla also tested the “contact hypothesis,” which suggests that exposure to a member of a stigmatized group reduces prejudice toward that group. They tested it by including transgender canvassers in their study.

Before and after the conversation, participants were given a variety of survey questions. The researchers took care to conceal the true nature of the survey, which probed attitudes about transgender individuals. Participants showed no indications of suspicion about the true nature of the survey.

I think this is probably a hard thing to measure especially if you are trying to not influence the subject about what you are testing for. It will be interesting to read the full report.