Pornography Consumption,Education,and Support for Same-Sex Marriage Among Adult U.S. Males

Abstract

Many consider same-sex marriage the civil rights issue of our time. Although support is on the rise, there are some Americans who oppose same-sex marriage. Heterosexual males are a demographic group particularly likely to oppose same-sex marriage. Mass media and education are often thought of as important agents of socialization in American culture. Pornography in particular is a platform often discussed in terms of its impact on males’ sexual attitudes. This study used nationally representative three-wave longitudinal data gathered from adult U.S. males to examine the over-time interplay between pornography consumption, education, and support for same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage did not prospectively predict pornography consumption, but pornography consumption did prospectively predict support for same-sex marriage. Education was also positively associated with support for same-sex marriage. Scientific and social implications of these findings are discussed.

Keywords

same-sex marriage pornography education selective exposure

Introduction and Background

A variety of U.S. commentators have identified same-sex marriage as “the civil rights issue of our time” (Dowd, 2011, para. 16; “Legislature Should Vote for Same-Sex Marriage,” 2012, para. 3; Ruffin, 2011, para. 1). Social scientific data suggest that same-sex couples and their children suffer a variety of negative consequences due to same-sex couples’ inability to marry. Herek (2006) reviewed the literature on marriage and well-being and concluded the following:

Marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits . . . Same-sex couples and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships. (p. 607)

Public support for same-sex marriage is on the rise in the United States. Gallup Poll data (May 20, 2011) showed, for the first time, that a majority of adult Americans (53%) agreed that “marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriage” (Newport, 2011). There are many Americans, however, who still oppose same-sex marriage. At present just six states (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont) and Washington, D.C., allow same-sex marriage (Maloney, 2012).

Given the documented benefits of marriage and the variability in support for same-sex marriage among individuals of voting age in the United States, research is needed that identifies predictors of support for same-sex marriage. Research to date has primarily explored demographic predictors, such as age, gender (Newport, 2011), ethnicity (Lewis & Gossett, 2008), and political orientation (Persily, Egan, & Wallsten, 2006). Identifying demographic predictors is important. But it is perhaps more important to identify socializing forces that predict change in support for same-sex marriage over time.

Mass media and education are often thought of as important agents of socialization in American culture (Potter, 2005). Little research exists on either social influence and on support for same-sex marriage in the United States, however. Research that has been conducted on education (Lewis, 2005) and media consumption in the form of news media (Becker & Scheufele, 2011) found little evidence that either factor significantly contributed to views on same-sex marriage. But the news media’s capacity to change attitudes has long been questioned (Cohen, 1963; McCombs & Shaw, 1972). And studies correlating education with acceptance of homosexuality more generally (Herek, 1984, 1991; Loftus, 2001) cast doubt on the dependability of research suggesting that attitudes toward same-sex marriage are independent of education.

Attitudes toward same-sex marriage are, in essence, sexual attitudes. According to both liberal (Luciano, 2012) and conservative (Hawkins, 2012) commentators, the number one factor that determines attitudes toward same-sex marriage is attitudes toward same-sex sex. Indeed, Americans’ attitudes toward same-sex sex are strongly correlated with their attitudes toward same-sex marriage (Davis & Smith, 2010).

Pornography consumption may be a more reliable predictor of sexual attitudes than consumption of news or other nonsexual media. Pornography may be defined, broadly, as mediated content depicting nudity and explicit sexual acts (Wright, Malamuth, & Donnerstein, 2012). Recent cross-sectional survey research has correlated pornography consumption with more acceptance of a wide variety of nontraditional sexual behaviors (Braun-Courville & Rojas, 2009; Carroll et al., 2008; Weinberg, Williams, Kleiner, & Irizarry, 2010; Wright, 2011b). Longitudinal and experimental studies have found that earlier pornography exposure predicts subsequent changes in nontraditional sexual attitudes and behaviors (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Peter & Valkenburg, 2010; Wright, 2012, 2013; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988). Media sexual socialization theory (Wright, 2011a; Wright, Malamuth, et al., 2012) suggests that the effect of sexual media on social attitudes may depend on consumers’ level of education. As indicated previously, level of education may be particularly germane to research on attitudes toward homosexuality. Accordingly, this study employs nationally representative, three-wave longitudinal data provided by the General Social Survey (GSS) to explore the over-time interplay between pornography consumption, education, and support for same-sex marriage among heterosexual male adults in the United States. Heterosexual males were selected for analysis because they are the primary target of and consumers of pornography (Cooper, Morahan-Martin, Mathy, & Maheu, 2002; Malamuth, 1996; Sabina, Wolak, & Finkelhor, 2008) and have more negative attitudes toward homosexuality generally and toward same-sex marriage specifically than females (Kite & Whitley, 1996; Lewis & Gossett, 2008; Newport, 2011).

This study makes several additional contributions to the literature besides being the first to examine change in support for same-sex marriage over time as a function of pornography consumption. First, numerous experimental studies have demonstrated pornography’s socializing impact (Mundorf, Allen, D’Alessio, & Emmers-Sommer, 2007; Oddone-Paolucci, Genuis, & Violato, 2000), but some critics dismiss experimental pornography research out of hand for imposing pornography consumption on participants (Berkowitz & Donnerstein, 1982; Gunter, 2002; Pappas, 2012). This study measures self-reported pornography consumption, avoiding this critique. Second, this study employs a cross-lagged longitudinal panel design, the best method for assessing causality after the experimental design (Little, Card, Preacher, & McConnell, 2009). While many cross-sectional survey studies have correlated pornography consumption with sexual attitudes and behaviors, only a few longitudinal studies exist assessing the temporal sequencing of these associations (e.g., Peter & Valkenburg, 2010, 2011a; Wright, 2012). Third, pornography studies typically use convenience samples of college students. Dependence on convenience sampling of college students for data generation allows critics of pornography research to reject results as ungeneralizable and uninformative. For instance, in a recent evaluation of the literature on the effects of pornography on aggression, Ferguson and Hartley (2009) concede that survey studies have found positive associations between pornography consumption and aggressive behavior: “Results of these studies, however, must be taken with a grain of salt as they used college students only” (p. 326). This study addresses this critique by utilizing a randomly selected, nationally representative sample of U.S. adults. Finally, many pornography studies assess straightforward pornography consumption–sexuality associations (Morgan, 2011; Wingood et al., 2001; Wright & Randall, 2012). Demonstrating overall associations is important, but the assessment of moderating factors is necessary for theory-building (Kingston, Malamuth, Fedoroff, & Marshall, 2009; Wright, 2011a). This study addresses this need by assessing whether the over-time association between pornography consumption and change in support for same-sex marriage depends on level of education.

Literature Review

Pornography and Sexual Socialization

Wright has developed a sexual script acquisition, activation, and application model (₃AM) of sexual socialization that explains how consumption of sexual media can affect human sexuality (Wright, 2011a, 2011b, 2012, 2013; Wright & Arroyo, in press; Wright, Malamuth et al., 2012; Wright & Randall, 2012; Wright, Randall, & Arroyo, 2012). The ₃AM draws on numerous media, information-processing, and behavioral theories, including social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2001), cultivation (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, & Signorielli, 1994), uses and gratifications (Rubin, 2002), media dependency (Rubin & Windahl, 1986), and priming (Berkowitz & Rogers, 1986). The ₃AM draws most heavily, however, on the information-processing model of media effects developed by Huesmann (1986; see also Huesmann, 1988, 1998).

Huesmann (1986, 1988, 1998) theorizes that mediated influence occurs through the provision of scripts. Scripts are socially constructed expectations for human behavior. Scripts indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate. Scripts also portend the outcomes of various behaviors. Sexual scripts can reference very specific behaviors (e.g., the appropriateness and consequences of unprotected male-to-male anal sex) or more abstract perspectives on sexual behavior (e.g., the appropriateness and consequences of consensual sex of whatever variety between same-sex couples who are either male or female). A scripts explanation for human sexuality has been advocated by several sex researchers (Gagnon & Simon, 1973; Laws & Schwartz, 1977).

According to the ₃AM, sexual media can provide viewers with sexual scripts they were unaware of (acquisition), prime sexual scripts they were already aware of (activation), and encourage the utilization of sexual scripts by portraying particular sexual behaviors or general patterns of sexual behavior as normative, acceptable, and beneficial (application). Script application can occur at the level of personal behavior (e.g., deciding to personally engage in a particular behavior or pattern of behavior) or judgment (e.g., deciding that people in general should be able to engage in a particular behavior or pattern of behavior). In the context of the present study, script application would occur at the level of judgment (i.e., deciding that same-sex couples should be able to marry). The ₃AM was developed to explain the effects of mainstream media sex (Wright, 2011a) but has since been applied to pornography both in conceptual discussion (Wright, Malamuth, et al., 2012; see also Malamuth, Hald, & Koss, 2012) and empirical investigation (Wright, 2011b, 2012, 2013; Wright & Arroyo, in press; Wright & Randall, 2012). Figure 1 presents a diagrammatic summary of the ₃AM model.

Figure 1.

Diagrammatic summary of the ₃AM.

What types of scripts might pornography activate that would affect heterosexual males’ attitudes toward same-sex marriage? Prior research suggests two possibilities.¹

First, there is evidence that pornography activates a sexually “liberal” mind-set (Linz & Malamuth, 1993) that embraces nonjudgment toward and even approval of nontraditional sexual behavior. For instance, studies have found that pornography consumption correlates positively with approval of and/or engagement in nontraditional sexual behaviors such as having multiple sexual partners, having ongoing relationships with multiple sexual partners, one-night stands, premarital sex, extramarital sex, extrarelational sex, group sex, sex for pay, and casual sex (Braun-Courville & Rojas, 2009; Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Carroll et al., 2008; Lo & Wei, 2005; Maddox, Rhoades, & Markman, 2011; Morgan, 2011; Omori, Zhang, Allen, Ota, & Imamura, 2011; Peter & Valkenburg, 2006; Weinberg et al., 2010; Wingood et al., 2001; Wright, 2011b; Wright & Randall, 2012; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988).

Especially relevant are two recent national longitudinal studies of adults aged 45 years on average that found that present pornography consumption predicted subsequent permissive sexual attitudes (Wright, 2013) and casual sex behavior (Wright, 2012). Even more relevant is an experimental study that found that showing males pornography led to more support for “the view that parties should be free to form and discontinue intimate relationships without regulations by any government” (Zillmann & Bryant, 1988, p. 529).

Second, there is evidence that pornography activates sexual scripts supportive of traditional masculinity. Interrogations of pornography carried out by humanistic scholars find that pornography portrays men as sexually powerful, controlling, aggressive, and dominant (Jensen, 2007). Social scientific researchers concur. Frable, Johnson, and Kellman (1997) summarize content analyses of pornography as follows:

“Pornographic films, books, and magazines magnify the “‘male means masculine’” stereotype. Sex episodes are acts of virile, redblooded men (Smith, 1976); they are always in charge (Cowan et al., 1988; Dietz & Evans, 1982), and deviations from this pattern are treated derisively (Palys, 1986; Smith, 1976). (p. 314)”

Recent quantitative content analyses support Frable et al.’s (1997) and others (Bridges et al., 2010; Sun, Bridges, Wosnitzer, Scharrer, & Liberman, 2008) summaries. For instance, Sun et al. analyzed 61 scenes randomly selected from 33 of the most-rented male-directed pornographic films of 2004-2005. Males engaged in physically dominant acts in 83.6% of scenes and verbally dominant acts in 49.2% of scenes.

Accordingly, several studies have found that pornography exposure correlates positively with support for traditional sex roles among males (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Garcia, 1986). Support for traditional sex roles has been and continues to be a reliable predictor of antihomosexual sentiment (Keiller, 2010; Kite & Whitley, 1996).

In sum, pornography appears to activate liberal, nonjudgmental sexual scripts (which should support homosexuality) and scripts supportive of traditional masculinity (which opposes homosexuality). The tension between these scripts coupled with the lack of prior research on pornography consumption and attitudes toward homosexuality make a specific prediction about the association between pornography consumption and attitudes toward same-sex marriage difficult. Consequently, the following research question is proposed:

Research Question 1 (RQ1): What is the nature of the prospective association between pornography consumption and attitudes toward same-sex marriage?

Education as a potential moderator

Media portrayals of sex are often unrealistic (Allen, D’Alessio, Emmers, & Gebhardt, 1996; Kunkel, Eyal, Finnerty, Biely, & Donnerstein, 2005). Correspondingly, the ₃AM predicts that viewers are less likely to be affected when they are able and apt to engage in critical thinking. The premise underlying this assertion is simple: Critical thinkers should be critical viewers, and critical viewers’ skepticism of sexual media’s authenticity and real-world applicability should reduce the probability of sexual socialization. From the perspective of the ₃AM, critical viewing should reduce the likelihood that mediated sexual scripts will be both acquired and activated, and scripts that are not acquired or activated cannot be applied. To put it another way, critical viewers’ dismissal of fantastic media portrayals of sex prevents the levels of both message reception and message yielding required for the influence process to culminate (McGuire, 1985).

The premise that critical viewing inhibits pornographic socialization undergirds a body of experimental studies attempting to show that educational briefings prevent effects from exposure to violent pornography (Allen et al., 1996). In such studies, “educational briefings consisted of a short audiotape or written handout pointing out that the material consumed is fictional and fantasy” (p. 136). A meta-analysis suggests that such briefings appear to be successful in preventing social learning from pornography (Allen et al., 1996).

In sum, there is evidence from several pornography studies that media literacy interventions can increase the criticality of viewers and reduce the likelihood of effects. It seems likely, however, that viewers differ in critical thinking aptitude and ability irrespective of interventions. These preexisting differences should also moderate effects. Two experimental studies—one in the realm of mainstream media sex (Bryant & Rockwell, 1994), one in the realm of pornography (Bogaert, Woodard, & Hafer, 1999)—suggest the importance of preexisting differences in critical thinking.

Bryant and Rockwell’s (1994) study involved 13- and 14-year-old adolescents. Some participants viewed multiple hours of television programming featuring pre and extramarital sex; the remaining participants did not view any sexual programming. All participants then watched several vignettes featuring sexual “improprieties” (p. 187), such as a married individual having an affair, and were asked to render judgments about how “bad” the behavior was and how “wronged” the victim was (p. 188). Viewing sexual television led to reduced perceptions of the immorality of the sexual improprieties and the harm they caused but only among youth who were not critical viewers. These results were interpreted as supporting the contention that “critical media consumption” facilitates “resistance to attitude change” (p. 189).

Bogaert et al.’s (1999) research involved undergraduate males who were exposed to various types of pornography and then allowed to interact with a female confederate. Like Bryant and Rockwell (1994), Bogaert et al. (1999) hypothesized that critical viewing would inhibit effects. Specifically, they reasoned that high IQ males would be critical viewers resistant to pornographic influence: “A likely candidate for a moderator is intelligence, because of its relation to critical and analytical thinking which, in turn, affects resistance to persuasion (Rhodes & Wood, 1992)” (p. 283). In alignment with this supposition, low-IQ men’s—but not high-IQ men’s—sexually suggestive behavior toward a female confederate increased after exposure to more unrealistic pornography.

The GSS does not assess critical thinking. However, like Bogaert et al. (1999), the present study reasons that critical thinking may be tapped indirectly. An indicator suggested by prior pornography research on educational debriefings and research on critical thinking is level of education. Debriefing research suggests that educational efforts directed specifically at pornography literacy reduce social learning from pornography, but it might also be the case that education in general results in critical thinking skills that reduce the suasory impact of pornography’s “unreal” presentation of sex (Allen et al., 1996, p. 136). Formal education has long been considered a central pathway to critical thinking (Pithers & Soden, 2000), and the two are correlated (Denney, 1995).

In total, theory and prior media sex research suggest that attitude change from exposure to pornography is more likely for less educated individuals. More educated individuals’ should have a higher degree of criticality and skepticism toward pornography than less educated individuals. This criticality should prevent the acquisition and activation of pornographic scripts, and unacquired or inactive scripts cannot influence the formation of social judgments (Wright, 2011a). For these reasons, it is predicted that the over-time association between change in attitudes toward same-sex marriage from pornography exposure will be stronger for less educated males.

However, it is expected that education will be positively correlated with support for same-sex marriage. According to Lewis and Gossett (2008), acceptance of homosexuality “tends to rise with education, which exposes one to more diverse perspectives [and] teaches social and political tolerance” (p. 9). Research by Denny (2011) generated the same conclusion: “Increases in education causes individuals to be significantly more tolerant of homosexuals” (p. 2). The following hypothesis is thus proposed:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): The prospective association between pornography consumption and attitudes toward same-sex marriage is stronger for less educated individuals, but educated individuals are more supportive of same-sex marriage.

Pornography and Selective Exposure

Hypothesis 1 adopts a sexual socialization account for why males who consume pornography are more likely to possess attitudes congruent with pornography’s perspective on sex. To put it another way, H1 reflects a social learning stance on pornography consumption: Consumption of pornography leads to more agreement with the sexual philosophy of pornography. But a “selective exposure” explanation is also possible (Cotton, 1985). From this perspective, correlations between pornography exposure and content-congruent sexual attitudes arise because people who already possess those sexual attitudes selectively expose themselves to pornography. As such, the selective exposure perspective would predict that earlier attitudes toward same-sex marriage predict subsequent pornography consumption.

Cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957) provides a theoretical explanation for selective exposure (Cotton, 1985). Dissonance is psychological turbulence or discomfort. Dissonance is enhanced when individuals encounter information that contradicts their attitudes and is reduced when individuals encounter information that supports their attitudes. From this perspective, media consumers should “avoid information that they expect will be discrepant or disagreeable and seek out information that is expected to be congruent with their preexisting attitudes” (Bennett & Iyengar, 2008, p. 719). The possibility of selective exposure to media has intrigued and continues to intrigue communication researchers (D’Alessio & Allen, 2007; Klapper, 1960).

While intuitive, the selective exposure perspective has not received much support in longitudinal pornography research (Peter & Valkenburg, 2010, 2011a; Wright, 2012). These studies find that pornography exposure reliably predicts over-time change in sexual attitudes and behavior, but sexual attitudes and behavior do not reliably predict over-time change in pornography consumption. After reviewing the pornography use research, Wright (2012) surmised that the lack of a selective exposure finding may be because motives such as stress reduction, boredom relief, loneliness alleviation, and masturbatory stimulation are more important predictors of pornography consumption than attitudinal or behavioral corroboration. Consequently, the present study asks the following question:

Research Question 2 (RQ2): Do attitudes toward same-sex marriage prospectively predict pornography consumption?

Method

Data Source

Data were provided by the GSS (Davis & Smith, 2010). Funded by the National Science Foundation, the GSS is the only ongoing, national, full-probability survey examining social beliefs and behaviors currently carried out in the United States (The National Data Program, 2011). The GSS surveys residence-inhabiting adults age 18 years or older. Comparisons of the makeup of GSS participants with census data indicate that the GSS has high external validity (National Opinion Research Center, 2011a). The GSS has traditionally sampled from a novel group of respondents at each data collection. In 2006, the GSS introduced a panel component. Participants in the present study were 530 males who participated in GSSs 2006 (T1), 2008 (T2), and 2010 (T3). Weight variable “wtpannr123” was applied in accordance with GSS Panel Data Release Notes (National Opinion Research Center, 2011b).

The primary purpose of this inquiry was to assess whether consuming pornography correlates with change in heterosexual males’ attitude toward same-sex marriage. Participants in panels GSS 2006, 2008, and 2010 were not asked directly about their sexual orientation. They were asked, however, about the sex of their sexual partners in the past 5 years. Participants who had a male sexual partner in the past 5 years (n = 19) were deleted from the sample (530 participants who did not have sex with a male in the past 5 years/549 total participants = 97% of participants whose sexual behavior suggests a heterosexual orientation). Data gathered from different respondents for cross-sectional GSS 2008 and different respondents for cross-sectional GSS 2010 suggest the accuracy of this assessment of males’ sexual orientation. Participants in cross-sectional GSS 2008 and 2010 were asked directly about their sexual orientation. Specifically, participants in cross-sectional GSS 2008 and 2010 were asked whether they were “gay, lesbian, or homosexual” or “bisexual” or “heterosexual or straight.” In alignment with the present study’s tactic for identifying sexual orientation, 97% of male respondents in cross-sectional GSS 2008 and 97% of male respondents in cross-sectional GSS 2010 identified themselves as heterosexual or straight.²

Measures

The study’s measures are described below. The GSS began using computer-assisted personal interviewing procedures in 2002. To maximize measurement validity, sex-related data are reported confidentially by participants using computer-assisted self-interviewing procedures (J. Kim, personal communication, January 9, 2012). Measurement consistency was established via test-retest reliability. Expectations for the size of test-retest correlations depend on the variables under examination (DeVellis, 1991). For example, demographic measures should have high test-retest correlations. Opinion measures should have lower test-retest correlations, as opinions may fluctuate over time. Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlations.

Variable^a	Mean (SD)	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. T1 age	44.40 (16.86)	.04	−.22**	.15**	−.33**	−.27**	−.30**	−.28**	−.31**	−.24**
2. T1 education	13.93 (2.86)	—	−.09	−.01	−.05	.07	.05	.11*	−.08	.14**
3. T1 ethnicity^b	0.26 (0.44)		—	−.31**	.14*	.07	.17*	−.01	.20*	.03
4. T1 liberalism-conservatism^c	4.24 (1.44)			—	−.27**	−.36**	−.23**	−.33**	−.22**	−.31**
5. T1 pornography^d	0.32 (0.47)				—	.13	.58**	.23**	.51**	.29**
6. T1 same-sex marriage^e	2.50 (1.48)					—	.15*	.70**	.07	.64**
7. T2 pornography^d	0.37 (0.48)						—	.22**	.54**	.25**
8. T2 same-sex marriage^e	2.60 (1.43)							—	.09	.71**
9. T3 pornography^d	0.31 (0.46)								—	.18*
10. T3 same-sex marriage^e	2.60 (1.45)									—

Arranged alphabetically, by wave.

White = 0, non-White = 1.

Higher scores = more conservative.

No exposure = 0, exposure = 1.

Higher scores = more support for same-sex marriage.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Demographics

Demographics at baseline (T1) were as follows. Participants were 44.40 years old on average (SD = 16.86). Age at T1 was strongly correlated with age at T2 (r = .99, p < .01) and T3 (r = .99, p < .01). Following Wright (2011b) and Wright and Randall (2012), ethnicity was operationalized as White (coded 0) or Nonwhite (coded 1). Whites comprised 73.8% of participants. Ethnicity at T1 was strongly correlated with ethnicity at T2 (r = .86, p < .01) and T3 (r = .79, p < .01). Following Wright (2011b, 2012), education was operationalized in terms of the number of years of school participants had completed (M = 13.93, SD = 2.86). Education at T1 was strongly correlated with education at T2 (r = .77, p < .01) and T3 (r = .85, p < .01). Following Vaisey (2006), political orientation was operationalized in terms of whether participants considered themselves liberal or conservative (1 = extremely liberal, 7 = extremely conservative; M = 4.24, SD = 1.44). Political orientation at T1 was strongly correlated with political orientation at T2 (r = .60, p < .01) and T3 (r = .61, p < .01).

Pornography consumption

Pornography consumption was assessed at T1, T2, and T3 by asking participants whether or not they had viewed a pornographic film in the prior year (0 = no, 1 = yes). 32.2% said they had viewed a pornographic film in the prior year at T1, 36.4% at T2, 30.6% at T3. Pornography consumption at T1 was strongly correlated with pornography consumption at T2 (r = .58, p < .01) and T3 (r = .51, p < .01). Prior research suggests that conservatives should be less likely to consume pornography than liberals (Linz & Malamuth, 1993) and that non-Whites should be more likely to consume pornography than Whites (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Wright, 2011b). Accordingly, the criterion validity of this measure is suggested by conservatives being less likely to consume pornography than liberals at T1 (r = −.27, p < .01), T2 (r = −.28, p < .01), and T3 (r = −.16, p < .01), and by non-Whites being more likely to consume pornography than Whites at T1 (r = .14, p < .05), T2 (r = .16, p < .01), and T3 (r = .29, p < .01).

Dichotomous classification of participants into “‘did not consume pornography/did consume pornography’” categories has yielded theoretically predictable results in a number of studies. Kjellgren, Priebe, Svedin, and Langstrom (2010) found that Swedish adolescents who consumed violent pornography were more likely to be sexually coercive than Swedish adolescents who did not consume violent pornography. Ybarra, Mitchell, Hamburger, Diener-West, and Leaf (2011) found that the same dichotomous classification (i.e., never consumed violent pornography/had consumed violent pornography) predicted the sexually aggressive behavior of American adolescents. Wingood et al. (2001) found that female adolescents who consumed pornographic films were more likely to have multiple sexual partners than female adolescents who did not consume pornographic films. Most relevant to the present study, Wright (2011b) found that adult males who consumed pornographic films were more likely to hold permissive sexual attitudes (e.g., more positive attitudes toward extramarital sex) and engage in permissive sexual behaviors (e.g., sex with multiple partners) than adult males who did not consume pornographic films.

Support for same-sex marriage

Support for same-sex marriage was assessed at T1, T2, and T3 by asking participants whether they agreed or disagreed that homosexual couples should have the right to marry one another (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree; T1: M = 2.50, SD = 1.48; T2: M = 2.60, SD = 1.43; T3: M = 2.60, SD = 1.45). Support for same-sex marriage at T1 was strongly correlated with support for same-sex marriage at T2 (r = .70, p < .01) and T3 (r = .64, p < .01). Prior research suggests that conservatives should be less likely to support same-sex marriage than liberals (Lewis & Gossett, 2008; Newport, 2011). Accordingly, the criterion validity of this measure is suggested by conservatives being less likely than liberals to support same-sex marriage at T1 (r = −.36, p < .01), T2 (r = −.41, p < .01), and T3 (r = −.30, p < .01).

Analytic Approach

Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were employed to test H1 and H2. Change in R² was used to assess the significance of the association between pornography consumption and subsequent attitudes toward same-sex marriage (H1) and the interaction of pornography consumption and education to subsequent attitudes toward same-sex marriage (H2; Aiken & West, 1991). As the ₃AM predicts that audience characteristics that exist prior to sexual media exposure are responsible for differing socialization effects, T1 education was multiplied by T2 pornography consumption to create the interaction term. To interpret the interaction, simple-slope tests were carried out at one standard deviation above and below the mean of education (Aiken & West, 1991). A hierarchical logistic regression analysis was carried out to test RQ1. Change in χ² was used to assess the significance of the association between attitudes toward same-sex marriage and subsequent pornography consumption (Rose, Chassin, Presson, & Sherman, 2000). Interval variables were mean centered in all analyses (Howell, 2002).

As outlined in the literature review, significant correlations between pornography consumption and sexual attitudes are usually attributed to sexual socialization (pornography changes attitudes) or selective exposure (people with particular attitudes gravitate to pornography). An alternative possibility, however, is that some prior factor (also known as a “third variable” confound; Little et al., 2009) causes both subsequent pornography consumption and/or subsequent sexual attitudes. In the case of pornography consumption predicting subsequent attitudes toward same-sex marriage, it may be the case that earlier attitudes toward same-sex marriage cause both subsequent pornography consumption and subsequent attitudes toward same-sex marriage. Consequently, T1 attitudes toward same-sex marriage was entered in the initial multiple regression step and T2 pornography consumption in the second step when testing H1 and H2, which predicted associations between pornography consumption and subsequent attitudes toward same-sex marriage (assessed at T3). In the case of attitudes toward same-sex marriage predicting subsequent pornography consumption, it may be the case that earlier pornography consumption causes both subsequent attitudes toward same-sex marriage and subsequent pornography consumption. Consequently, T1 pornography consumption was entered in the initial logistic regression step and T2 attitudes toward same-sex marriage in the second step when testing RQ1, which asked whether attitudes toward same-sex marriage predict subsequent pornography consumption (assessed at T3).

Other potential confounds suggested by prior research include political orientation (Lewis & Gossett, 2008; Linz & Malamuth, 1993; Newport, 2011), age (Braun-Courville & Rojas, 2009; Wright, 2011b), ethnicity (Brown et al., 2006; Hennessy, Bleakley, Fishbein, & Jordan, 2009), and education (Wright, 2011b). These variables were assessed at T1 and were also entered in the initial step of all analyses.

Results

RQ1: Sexual Socialization

Prior pornography consumption was associated with more subsequent support for same-sex marriage (see Table 2). Specifically, after controlling for T1 attitudes toward same-sex marriage, age, education, ethnicity, and political affiliation (Step 1), T2 pornography consumption (Step 2) contributed to the prediction of T3 attitudes toward same-sex marriage at the significance threshold (R² change = .01, F change = 3.84, p = .05). Consuming pornography at T2 was associated with an increase in support for same-sex marriage at T3 (β = 0.13).

Table 2.

Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting T3 Support for Same-Sex Marriage.

	R² change	F change	B	β	SE
Step 1^a	.39	20.16**
T1 age			−0.02*	−0.16	0.01
T1 education			0.07*	0.13	0.03
T1 ethnicity^b			−0.57*	−0.18	0.22
T1 liberalism-conservatism^c			−0.11	−0.10	0.07
T1 same-sex marriage^d			0.46**	0.49	0.06
Step 2	.01	3.84^†
T2 pornography^e			0.38^†	0.13	0.19
R² total	.40

Variables arranged alphabetically, by step.

White = 0, non-White = 1.

Higher scores = more conservative.

Higher scores = more support for same-sex marriage.

No exposure = 0, exposure = 1.

†

p = .05. *p < .05. **p < .01.

H1: Moderating Role of Education

Hypothesis 1 was supported. After controlling for T1 attitudes toward same-sex marriage, age, education, ethnicity, and political affiliation (Step 1) and adding T2 pornography consumption to the model (Step 2), the interaction of T1 education and T2 pornography consumption (Step 3) contributed to the prediction of T3 attitudes toward same-sex marriage (R² change = .02, F change = 6.42, p < .05).³ As predicted, education was associated with more support for same-sex marriage (β = 0.13, p < .05), but present support for same-sex marriage did not covary with past pornography consumption for the more educated (β = −0.06, p = .57). Conversely, as predicted, past pornography consumption was associated with more support for same-sex marriage for the less educated (β = 0.30, p < .01). Figure 2 displays this interaction.

Figure 2.

Interaction of T1 education and T2 pornography consumption on T3 support for same-sex marriage.

RQ2: Selective Exposure

The selective exposure premise was not supported (see Table 3). After controlling for T1 pornography consumption, age, education, ethnicity, and political affiliation (Step 1), T2 attitudes toward same-sex marriage (Step 2) did not contribute to the prediction of T3 pornography consumption (χ² change = 00, p = .95).

Table 3.

Hierarchical Logistic Regression Analysis Predicting T3 Pornography Consumption.

	Nagelkerke R² change	χ² change	B (SE)	Wald	Odds ratio	95% Confidence interval odds ratio
Step 1^a	.41	57.72**
T1 age			−0.05 (0.02)	9.43**	0.96	[0.93, 0.98]
T1 education			0.14 (0.07)	3.43	1.15	[0.99, 1.33]
T1 ethnicity^b			1.48 (0.48)	9.37**	4.38	[1.70, 11.29]
T1 liberalism- conservatism^c			−0.10 (0.15)	0.43	0.91	[0.67, 1.22]
T1 pornography^d			1.71 (0.41)	17.56**	5.51	[2.48, 12.23]
Step 2	.00	.00
T2 same-sex marriage^e			−0.01 (0.17)	0.00	0.99	[0.72, 1.37]
Total Nagelkerke R²	.41

Variables arranged alphabetically, by step.

White = 0, non-White = 1.

Higher scores = more conservative.

No exposure = 0, exposure = 1.

Higher scores = more support for same-sex marriage.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Discussion

This study employed nationally representative three-wave panel data gathered in 2006, 2008, and 2010 to assess associations between heterosexual adult U.S. males’ consumption of pornography and attitudes toward same-sex marriage. This study appears to be the first quantitative analysis of these variables. Males were studied because they hold more negative attitudes toward same-sex marriage than females (Newport, 2011) and are more likely to consume pornography than females (Sabina et al., 2008). The following sections review the study’s findings, consider the scientific and social implications of the findings, and discuss directions for future research.

Review of Findings

That people who consume pornography are more likely to possess sexual attitudes and engage in sexual behaviors consistent with pornography’s perspective on sex has been demonstrated by numerous cross-sectional surveys (Braun-Courville & Rojas, 2009; Carroll et al., 2008; Lo & Wei, 2005; Maddox et al., 2011; Morgan, 2011; Omori et al., 2011; Peter & Valkenburg, 2006; Weinberg et al., 2010; Wingood et al., 2001; Wright, 2011b; Wright & Randall, 2012). Recent longitudinal studies have begun to tease out the directionality of these associations (Peter & Valkenburg, 2010, 2011a; Wright, 2012). In these studies, pornography consumption reliably predicted over-time change in sexual attitudes and behavior, but sexual attitudes and behavior did not reliably predict over-time change in pornography consumption. Similar results were found in this study. Specifically, support for same-sex marriage did not predict over-time increases in pornography consumption, but pornography consumption did predict over-time increases in support for same-sex marriage. However, the association between prior pornography consumption and subsequent support for same-sex marriage was moderated by education. While educated males were more supportive of same-sex marriage, this support was independent of their pornography consumption. Conversely, pornography consumption predicted changes toward more support for same-sex marriage for less educated males.

Scientific Implications

The scientific implications of the results of this study are as follows: First, they suggest the external validity of prior experimental research. Zillmann and Bryant (1988) found that male college students who had been shown video pornography were more likely than males who had not been shown video pornography to agree that the government should not prevent couples from entering into intimate relationships. This is important, as the external validity of experimental pornography research has been and continues to be questioned (Berkowitz & Donnerstein, 1982; Gunter, 2002; Pappas, 2012). Similarly, the generalizability of pornography studies using convenience samples of college students has been questioned. Along with other recent pornography research utilizing nationally representative samples (Peter & Valkenburg, 2011a; Wright, 2011b), this study suggests that studies of college students that find, for example, associations between consumption of pornography and attitudes toward women (Hald, Malamuth, & Yuen, 2010) or recreational sex (Weinberg et al., 2010) should perhaps be taken with more than “a grain of salt” (Ferguson & Hartley, 2009, p. 326).

Second, the next best method for assessing causation after the laboratory experiment is the longitudinal panel survey (Little et al., 2009). Two important criteria for establishing causality are covariation (phenomena fluctuate together in a quantifiable manner) and temporal sequencing (a cause should be observed before its effect is observed; Wright, 2011a). The present study met both these criteria regarding the hypothesis that pornography is a causal contributor to change in sexual attitudes: Pornography consumption was associated with over-time change in support for same-sex marriage; support for same-sex marriage was not associated with over-time change in pornography consumption.

Third, they support the ₃AM premise that consumers of sexual media, in addition to learning about specific sexual behaviors, may glean “the general rule or philosophy guiding media models’ behavior” (Wright, 2011a, p. 349). Huesmann (1986) calls this “higher order” scripting (p. 131). One would be hard-pressed to find a content analysis indicating that heterosexual pornography depicts or discusses same-sex marriage. Yet this study found that self-reported consumption of pornography prospectively predicts support for same-sex marriage, even after accounting for prior attitudes toward same-sex marriage and a number of confounds that prior research suggest are directly relevant to an analysis of pornography consumption and attitudes toward same-sex marriage. Likewise, experimental exposure to “standard fare” heterosexual pornography (i.e., nonviolent, consensual depictions of heterosexuals engaging in petting, oral sex, and intercourse) changes beliefs regarding behaviors that are not depicted (e.g., estimates of the percentage of people who engage in sadomasochism and bestiality; Zillmann & Bryant, 1982). Findings such as these suggest that pornography activates “abstract” perspectives on sexual behavior that may be used to render judgments across a variety of sexual contexts (Bandura, 2001, p. 275). For instance, the results of this and prior studies (e.g., Lo & Wei, 2005; Wright, 2011b) suggest that pornography activates a liberal sexual script that encourages nonjudgment toward and even approval of nontraditional sexual behavior.

Fourth, pornography exposure is associated with support for traditional sex roles (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988), and support for traditional sex roles has been and continues to be associated with antihomosexual sentiment (Keiller, 2010; Kite & Whitley, 1996). However, pornography exposure is also associated with a liberal, nonjudgmental perspective on sexuality and participation in nontraditional sexual behaviors (Braun-Courville & Rojas, 2009; Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Carroll et al., 2008; Lo & Wei, 2005; Maddox et al., 2011; Morgan, 2011; Omori et al., 2011; Peter & Valkenburg, 2006; Weinberg et al., 2010; Wingood et al., 2001; Wright, 2011b, 2012; Wright & Randall, 2012; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988).

Gallop poll data indicate that the cultural tide is turning in favor of support for same-sex marriage in the United States (Newport, 2011). In the words of Forbes editorialist Erik Kain (2011, para. 2), there appears to be “a cultural sea change in attitudes toward marriage equality in America.” Evidence indicating a similar upturn in support for traditional sex roles is difficult to locate. Consequently, the results of this study suggest that when sexual media activate competing sexual scripts, the script selected for application may depend on current social mores.

Finally, they support the theoretical position that attitudinal shifts from exposure to pornography will be more likely for some individuals than others (Kingston et al., 2009). Specifically, they suggest that attitudinal shifts from exposure to pornography may be less likely for more educated individuals. This finding is consistent with the ₃AM’s (Wright, 2011a) premise that sexual media effects are less likely when audiences are critical thinkers, as education is positively associated with critical thinking (Denney, 1995).⁴

Social Implications

Same-sex marriage continues to be a debated topic among social conservatives and liberals (“Conservative vs. Liberal: Gay Marriage,” 2012). If this study is considered in a political and social scientific vacuum, its implications for conservatives and liberals are straightforward. Liberals consider restrictions on same-sex marriage a violation of homosexuals’ civil and moral rights (Lewis & Gossett, 2008; Ruffin, 2011). Consequently, if pornography consumption and education generate support for same sex-marriage, both are to be encouraged. Social conservatives, conversely, consider same-sex marriage a threat to opposite-sex marriage and the traditional family (“Conservative vs. Liberal: Gay Marriage,” 2012). If pornography consumption and education generate support for same-sex marriage, pornography consumption should be discouraged and efforts should be made to “de-liberalize education” (Curtis, 2012, para. 6).

If a broader political and social scientific perspective is adopted, however, the social implications of this study are quite complicated, especially concerning pornography. If the only effect of pornography consumption was increased support for same-sex marriage, conservatives could discourage pornography consumption without conflict. But studies suggest that pornography consumption changes attitudes and increases the probability of behaviors supported by conservatives. As reviewed previously, pornography exposure correlates positively with support for traditional sex roles (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Garcia, 1986). For instance, an experimental study found that showing participants video pornography led to more agreement with the sentiment that “a stable marriage is best achieved by the wife yielding in most conflict situations” (Zillmann & Bryant, 1988, p. 530). As an additional illustration, content analytic research indicates that condoms are rarely used in pornography (Grudzen et al., 2009). Correspondingly, some research finds that pornography users are less likely to use condoms (Peter & Valkenburg, 2011b; Wingood et al., 2001). As condoms prevent procreation, the lack of condom use in pornography is in alignment with conservatives’ procreational values (“Conservative vs. Liberal: Gay Marriage,” 2012; Linz & Malamuth, 1993).

If the only effect of pornography consumption was increased support for same-sex marriage, then liberals could encourage pornography consumption without conflict. But studies suggest that pornography consumption changes attitudes and increases the probability of behaviors opposed by liberals. The prime example of this conflict has to do with attitudes supportive of violence against women. The present study explored males’ consumption of pornographic films in the mid-2000s. Bridges et al. (2010) content analyzed 304 scenes from 50 of the best-selling and most-rented pornographic films of 2004 and 2005. It was seen that 88.2% of scenes contained physical aggression such as spanking, gagging, slapping, hair pulling, and choking, and 48.7% of scenes contained verbal aggression, such as females being called “bitch” or “slut.” Across all aggressive acts (i.e., both physical and verbal), women were the targets 94.4% of the time. Correspondingly, meta-analyses indicate that pornography consumption correlates positively with attitudes supporting of violence against females (Allen, Emmers, Gebhardt, & Giery, 1995; Hald et al., 2010) and laboratory aggression committed by males against females (Allen, D’Alessio, & Brezgel, 1995). Recent survey research indicates that male pornography consumers express a higher likelihood of committing rape (Foubert, Brosi, & Bannon, 2011).

Results such as these led Saar (2012), a liberal activist, to make the following statement in a recent Huffington Post editorial:

I am deeply disappointed that the left continues to exalt porn as some manifestation of sexual liberation, free speech, or women’s empowerment - without any thoughtful discussion of how so much of present day porn legitimizes violent treatment of women and girls. (para. 6)

In sum, social scientific research suggests that pornography’s effects are diverse and not unilaterally supportive of or a challenge to a particular political philosophy. Blanket statements about pornography’s social benefits and costs reveal an unfamiliarity with social scientific pornography research. Ultimately, conclusions about whether pornography does more social harm than good or more social good than harm depend on the weight each individual attaches to particular sexual lessons potentially imparted by pornography.

Future Directions

Several future research directions are warranted. First, rather than asking about support for same-sex marriage in general, future studies should ask males about their support for male-male marriage and female-female marriage specifically. Males “have significantly stronger antipathy toward gay men than toward lesbian women” (Keiller, 2010, p. 38). Consequently, males’ attitudes toward female-female marriage may be more amenable to change. It is important to note, however, that prior research indicates that when respondents see the word “homosexual” (the term used in the GSS’s question about same-sex marriage), they overwhelming assume the question is asking about gay men (Haddock & Zanna, 1998). The results of this study, therefore, suggest a change in males’ attitude regarding male-male marriage.

Second, rather than asking about pornography consumption in general, future studies should ask about specific categories of pornography consumption. As reviewed previously, the pornography most popular with males features hypermasculine performers who conform rigidly to traditional masculine roles, and belief in traditional masculinity decreases the probability of support for homosexuals. But other genres of pornography exist. For instance, “idealized” pornography (aka “erotica”) depicts “graphic displays of physical sex” but stresses “compassionate portrayals of sexuality with emphasis on emotional aspects of heterosexual sex” (Gunter, 2002). Current examples of idealized pornography targeting heterosexuals can be found at http://www.erosexotica.com. Such pornography may activate liberal, nonjudgmental sexual scripts without activating traditional sex role scripts. Another pornography category worthy of exploration is female-female pornography. Female-female pornography is quite popular among males (Paul, 2009) and has obvious relevance to perceptions about homosexual sex.

Third, rather than classifying males into simple no exposure/exposure categories, future studies should assess varying degrees of pornography exposure. The ₃AM predicts that more frequent exposure to sexual media results in stronger socialization effects. Experimental research conducted by Zillmann and Bryant (1982) supports this premise.

Fourth, future studies should employ experimental designs using various categories of pornography. As discussed earlier, there are some scholars who dismiss experimental pornography research for lacking external validity. It is the contention of this article, however, that a combination of survey and experimental research provides the most conclusive evidence of the effects of pornography (see also Hald et al., 2010).

Fifth, future studies should continue to explore differences in Whites and non-Whites’ consumption of pornography and support for same-sex marriage. Pornography consumption predicted more support for same-sex marriage in this study, even after ethnicity was controlled. Still, it is interesting to observe that non-Whites were more likely to consume pornography than Whites but were less likely to support same-sex marriage than Whites. These findings are consistent with prior pornography research (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Wright, 2011b) and prior research on support for same-sex marriage (Bruni, 2011). One possible explanation is that non-Whites in general (Sutton, Brown, Wilson, & Klein, 2002) and Blacks in particular (Brown et al., 2006) may rely more on interpersonal sources than mediated sources to inform their sexual opinions.

Finally, it is likely that education is not the only individual difference that moderates the association between pornography consumption and support for same-sex marriage. Other moderators suggested by the ₃AM and other media effects theories are viewers’ motivations for viewing pornography (e.g., for entertainment versus information), level of psychological involvement with the content, degree of identification with pornography actors and actresses, and level of dependency on pornography for sexual learning.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

Paul J. Wright is an assistant professor in the Department of Telecommunications at Indiana University. His disciplinary interests are health and mass communication; his specialty interests within these domains are sexual socialization and sexual health.

Ashley K. Randall is a faculty member and postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Family Studies and Human Development at the University of Arizona. Her research focuses on couples’ emotional coordination. Her clinical work focuses on prevention, intervention, and therapies specific to couples.

References

Aiken

L. S.

West

S. G.

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Allen

D’Alessio

Brezgel

(1995). A meta-analysis summarizing the effects of pornography II: Aggression after exposure. Human Communication Research, 22, 258-283.

Allen

D’Alessio

Emmers

T. M.

Gebhardt

(1996). The role of educational briefings in mitigating effects of experimental exposure to violent sexually explicit material: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sex Research, 33, 135-141.

Allen

Emmers

T. M.

Gebhardt

Giery

(1995). Pornography and rape myth acceptance. Journal of Communication, 45, 5-26.

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 3, 265-299.

Baunach

D. M.

(2012). Changing same-sex marriage attitudes in America from 1988-2010. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76, 364-378.

Becker

A. B.

Scheufele

D. A.

(2011). New voters, new outlook? Predispositions, social networks, and the changing politics of gay civil rights. Social Science Quarterly, 92, 324-345.

Bennett

W. L.

Iyengar

(2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58, 707-731.

Benotsch

E. G.

Martin

A. M.

Espil

F. M.

Nettles

C. D.

Seal

D. W.

Pinkerton

S. D.

(2011). Internet use, recreational travel, and HIV risk behaviors in men who have sex with men. Journal of Community Health, 36, 398-405.

10.

Berkowitz

Donnerstein

(1982). External validity is more than skin deep: Some answers to criticisms of laboratory experiments. American Psychologist, 37, 245-257.

11.

Berkowitz

Rogers

K. H.

(1986). A priming effect analysis of media influence. In Bryant

Zillmann

(Eds.), Perspectives on media effects (pp. 57-81). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

12.

Bogaert

A. F.

Woodard

Hafer

C. L.

(1999). Intellectual ability and reactions to pornography. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 283-291.

13.

Braun-Courville

D. K.

Rojas

(2009). Exposure to sexually explicit web sites and adolescent sexual attitude and behaviors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45, 156-162.

14.

Bridges

A. J.

Wosnitzer

Scharrer

Sun

Liberman

(2010). Aggression and sexual behavior in best-selling pornography videos: A content analysis update. Violence Against Women, 16, 1065-1085.

15.

Brown

J. D.

L’Engle

K. L.

(2009). X-Rated: Sexual attitude and behaviors associated with U.S. early adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit media. Communication Research, 36, 129-151.

16.

Brown

J. D.

L’Engle

K. L.

Pardun

C. J.

Guo

Kenneavy

Jackson

(2006). Sexy media matter: Exposure to sexual content in music, movies, television, and magazines predicts black and white adolescents’ sexual behavior. Pediatrics, 117, 1018-1027.

17.

Bruni

(2011, October 31). Race, religion, and same-sex marriage. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/opinion/bruni-same-sex-marriage-and-blacks.html

18.

Bryant

Rockwell

S. C.

(1994). Effects of massive exposure to sexually oriented prime-time television programming on adolescents’’ moral judgment. In Zillmann

Bryant

Huston

A. C.

(Eds.), Media, children, and the family (pp. 183-195). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

19.

Campbell

D. E.

Monson

J. Q.

(2008). The religion card: Gay marriage and the 2004 presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 399-419.

20.

Carroll

J. S.

Padilla-Walker

L. M.

Nelson

L. J.

Olson

C. D.

McNamara Barry

Madsen

S. D.

(2008). Generation XXX: Pornography acceptance and use among emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23, 6-30.

21.

Cohen

B. C.

(1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

22.

Conservative vs. liberal: Gay marriage. (2012, February 19). Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2012/02/conservative-vs-liberal-gay-marriage.html

23.

Cooper

Morahan-Martin

Mathy

R. M.

Maheu

(2002). Toward an increased understanding of user demographics in online sexual activities. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 28, 105-129.

24.

Cotton

J. L.

(1985). Cognitive dissonance in selective exposure. In Zillmann

Bryant

(Eds.), Selective exposure to communication (pp. 11-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

25.

Curtis

H. E.

(2012, March 31). Parchment and quill. Retrieved from http://hecurtis.wordpress.com/2012/03/31/pen-book-and-quill/

26.

D’Alessio

Allen

(2007). The selective exposure hypothesis and media choice processes. In Preiss

R. W.

Gayle

B. M.

Burrell

Allen

Bryant

(Eds.), Mass media effects research (pp. 103-118). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

27.

Davis

J. A.

Smith

T. W.

(2010). General Social Surveys, 1972-2008. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.

28.

Denney

N. W.

(1995). Critical thinking during the adult years. Experimental Aging Research, 21, 191-207.

29.

Denny

(2011). Civic returns to education: Its effect on homophobia. Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/p/ucd/wpaper/201109.html

30.

DeVellis

R. F.

(1991). Scale development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

31.

Dowd

(2011, June 25). Why is he bi? (sigh). New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/opinion/sunday/26dowd.html

32.

Ferguson

C. J.

Hartley

R. D.

(2009). The pleasure is momentary . . . the expense damnable? The influence of pornography on rape and sexual assault. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 323-329.

33.

Festinger

(1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.

34.

Foubert

J. D.

Brosi

M. W.

Bannon

R. S.

(2011). Pornography viewing among fraternity men: Effects on bystander intervention, rape myth acceptance, and behavioral intent to commit sexual assault. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 18, 212-231.

35.

Frable

Johnson

A. E.

Kellman

(1997). Seeing masculine men, sexy women, and gender differences: Exposure to pornography and cognitive constructions of gender. Journal of Personality, 65, 311-354.

36.

Gagnon

J. H.

Simon

(1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

37.

Garcia

. (1986). Exposure to pornography and attitudes about women and rape: A correlational study. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 378-385.

38.

Gerbner

Gross

Morgan

Signorielli

(1980). The mainstreaming of America: Violence profile No. 11. Journal of Communication, 30, 10-29.

39.

Gerbner

Gross

Morgan

Signorielli

(1994). Growing up with television: The cultivation perspective. In Bryant

Zillmann

(Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 17-41). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

40.

Grudzen

C. R.

Elliott

M. N.

Kerndt

P. R.

Schuster

M. A.

Brooks

R. H.

Gelberg

(2009). Condom use and high-risk sexual acts in adult films: A comparison of heterosexual and homosexual films. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 1-5.

41.

Gunter

(2002). Media sex: What are the issues? Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

42.

Haddock

Zanna

M. P.

(1998). Authoritarianism, values, and the favorability and structure of antigay attitudes. In Herek

(Ed.), Stigma and sexual orientation: Understanding prejudice against lesbian women, gay men, and bisexuals (pp. 82-107). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

43.

Hald

G. M.

Malamuth

N. M.

Yuen

(2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women: Revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies. Aggressive Behavior, 36, 14-20.

44.

Hawkins

(2012). Five reasons to oppose gay marriage. Rightwing News. Retrieved from http://www.rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/five-reasons-to-oppose-gay-marriage/

45.

Hennessy

Bleakley

Fishbein

Jordan

(2009). Estimating the longitudinal association between adolescent sexual behavior and exposure to sexual media content. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 1-11.

46.

Herek

G. M.

(1984). Beyond “homophobia”: A social psychological perspective on attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 10, 1-21.

47.

Herek

G. M.

(1991). Stigma, prejudice, and violence against lesbians and gay men. In Gonsiorek

J. C.

Weinrich

J. D.

(Eds.), Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy (pp. 60-80). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

48.

Herek

G. M.

(2006). Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective. American Psychologist, 61, 607-621.

49.

Howell

D. C.

(2002). Statistical method for psychology. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury.

50.

Huesmann

L. R.

(1986). Psychological processes promoting the relation between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior by the viewer. Journal of Social Issues, 42, 125-139.

51.

Huesmann

L. R.

(1988). An information processing model for the development of aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 14, 13-24.

52.

Huesmann

L. R.

(1998). The role of social information processing and cognitive schema in the acquisition and maintenance of habitual aggressive behavior. In Geen

R. G.

Donnerstein

(Eds.), Human aggression: Theories, research, and implications for policy (pp. 73-109). New York, NY: Academic Press.

53.

Jensen

(2007). Pornography and the end of masculinity. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

54.

Kain

(2011, May 20). Sea change in attitudes toward gay marriage. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/05/20/sea-change-in-attitudes-toward-gay-marriage/

55.

Keiller

S. W.

(2010). Masculine norms as correlates of heterosexual men’s attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 38-52.

56.

Kingston

D. A.

Malamuth

Fedoroff

Marshall

W. L.

(2009). The importance of individual differences in pornography use: Theoretical perspectives and implications for treating sexual offenders. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 216-232.

57.

Kite

M. E.

Whitley

B. E.

(1996). Sex differences in attitudes toward homosexual persons, behaviors, and civil rights: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 336-353.

58.

Kjellgren

Priebe

Svedin

Langstrom

(2010). Sexually coercive behavior in male youth: Population survey of general and specific risk factors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1161-1169.

59.

Klapper

(1960). The effects of mass communication. New York, NY: Free Press.

60.

Kunkel

Eyal

Finnerty

Biely

Donnerstein

(2005). Sex on TV 4: A biennial report to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

61.

Laws

J. L.

Schwartz

(1977). Sexual scripts: The social construction of female sexuality. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden.

62.

Legislature should vote for same-sex marriage, not leave question up to voters. (2012, April 15). The Seattle Times. Retrieved from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2017379320_edit31referendum.html

63.

Lewis

G. B.

(2005, November). Thinking about gay marriage: Putting the moral condemnation back in morality policy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Washington, DC.

64.

Lewis

G. B.

Gossett

C. W.

(2008). Changing public opinion on same-sex marriage: The case of California. Politics & Policy, 36, 4-30.

65.

Linz

Malamuth

(1993). Pornography. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

66.

Little

T. D.

Card

N. A.

Preacher

K. J.

McConnell

(2009). Modeling longitudinal data from research on adolescence. In Lerner

R. M.

Steinberg

(Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed., pp. 15-54). New York, NY: Wiley.

67.

Wei

(2005). Exposure to internet pornography and Taiwanese adolescents’ sexual attitude and behavior. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49, 221-237.

68.

Loftus

(2001). America’s liberalization in attitudes toward homosexuality, 1973 to 1998. American Sociological Review, 66, 762-782.

69.

Luciano

(2012). The complete idiot’s guide to opposing same-sex marriage. Policymic. Retrieved from http://www.policymic.com/articles/8190/the-complete-idiot-s-guide-to-opposing-same-sex-marriage

70.

Maddox

A. M.

Rhoades

G. K.

Markman

H. J.

(2011). Viewing sexually-explicit materials alone or together: Associations with relationship quality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 441-448.

71.

Malamuth

(1996). Sexually explicit media, gender differences, and evolutionary theory. Journal of Communication, 46, 8-31.

72.

Malamuth

N. M.

Hald

G. M.

Koss

(2012). Pornography, individual differences in risk and men’s acceptance of violence against women in a representative sample. Sex Roles, 66, 427-439.

73.

Maloney

(2012, April 15). Illinois not ready to say “‘I do’” to gay marriage. Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved from http://www.suntimes.com/news/11868177-418/illinois-not-ready-to-say-i-do-to-gay-marriage.html

74.

McCombs

M. E.

Shaw

D. L.

(1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176-187.

75.

McGuire

W. J.

(1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In Lindsey

Aronson

(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 233-346). New York, NY: Random House.

76.

Morgan

E. M.

(2011). Associations between young adults’ use of sexually explicit materials and their sexual preferences, behaviors, and satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 520-530.

77.

Mundorf

Allen

D’Alessio

Emmers-Sommer

T. M.

(2007). Effects of sexually explicit media. In Preiss

R. W.

Gayle

B. M.

Burrell

Allen.

Bryant

(Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 181-198). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

78.

National Opinion Research Center. (2011a). GSS codebook. Appendix A: Sampling design and weighting. Retrieved from http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/GSS+Website/Documentation/

79.

National Opinion Research Center. (2011b). GSS panel release notes. Retrieved from http://www3.norc.org/GSS+Website/Download/SPSS+Format/

80.

Newport

(2011, May 20). For first time, majority of Americans favor legal gay marriage. Gallup. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx

81.

Oddone-Paolucci

Genuis

Violato

(2000). A meta-analysis of the published research on the effects of pornography. In Violato

Oddone-Paolucci

Genuis

(Eds.), The changing family and child development (pp. 48-59). Aldershot, England: Ashgate.

82.

Olson

L. R.

Cadge

Harrison

J. T.

(2006). Religion and public opinion about same-sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly, 87, 340-360.

83.

Omori

Zhang

Y. B.

Allen

Ota

Imamura

(2011). Japanese college students’ media exposure to sexually explicit materials, perceptions of women, and sexually permissive attitudes. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 40, 93-110.

84.

Pappas

(March 23, 2012). Is porn bad for you? Santorum brings up tricky question. Live Science. Retrieved http://www.livescience.com/19251-pornography-effects-santorum.html

85.

Paul

(2009). Predicting internet pornography use and arousal: The role of individual difference variables. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 344-357.

86.

Persily

Egan

Wallsten

(2006). Gay marriage, public opinion and the courts (Public Law Working Paper No. 06-17). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Law School. Retrieved from http://www.law.upenn.edu/fac/npersily/gaymarriagessrn.pdf

87.

Peter

Valkenburg

P. M.

(2006). Adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit material on the Internet. Communication Research, 33, 178-204.

88.

Peter

Valkenburg

P. M.

(2010). Processes underlying the effects of adolescents’ use of sexually explicit internet material: The role of perceived realism. Communication Research, 37, 375-399.

89.

Peter

Valkenburg

P. M.

(2011a). The influence of sexually explicit Internet material and peers on stereotypical beliefs about women’s sexual roles: Similarities and differences between adolescents and adults. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 511-517.

90.

Peter

Valkenburg

P. M.

(2011b). The influence of sexually explicit Internet material on sexual risk behavior: A comparison of adolescents and adults. Journal of Health Communication, 16, 750-765.

91.

Pithers

R. T.

Soden

(2000). Critical thinking in education. Educational Research, 42, 237-249.

92.

Potter

W. J.

(2005). Media literacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

93.

Rose

J. S.

Chassin

Presson

C. C.

Sherman

S. J.

(2000). Prospective predictors of smoking cessation: A logistic regression application. In Rose

J. S.

Chassin

Presson

C. C.

Sherman

S. J.

(Eds.), Multivariate applications in substance use research: New methods for new questions (pp. 289-317). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

94.

Rubin

A. M.

(2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective on media effects. In Bryant

Zillmann

(Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 525-548). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

95.

Rubin

A. M.

Windahl

(1986). The uses and dependency model of mass communication. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 3, 184-189.

96.

Ruffin

(2011, December 28). It’s official: Gay is the new black. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/monique-ruffin/gay-civil-rights_b_1168897.html

97.

Saar

M. S.

(2012, March 21). Porn, santorum, and the politics of the left. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/malika-saada-saar/rick-santorum-porn_b_1369575.html

98.

Sabina

Wolak

Finkelhor

(2008). The nature and dynamics of internet pornography exposure for youth. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11, 691-693.

99.

Sun

Bridges

Wosnitzer

Scharrer

Liberman

(2008). A comparison of male and female directors in pornography: What happens when women are at the helm? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 312-325.

100.

Sutton

M. J.

Brown

Wilson

K. M.

Klein

J. D.

(2002). Shaking the tree of knowledge for forbidden fruit: Where adolescents learn about sexuality and contraception. In Brown

Steele

J. R.

Walsh-Childers

(Eds.), Sexual teens, sexual media (pp. 1-24). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

101.

The National Data Program for the Social Sciences. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/GSS+Website/About+GSS/National+Data+Program+for+Social+Sciences/

102.

Vaisey

(2006). Education and its discontents: Overqualification in America, 1972-2002. Social Forces, 85, 835-864.

103.

Weinberg

M. S.

Williams

C. J.

Kleiner

Irizarry

(2010). Pornography, normalization, and empowerment. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1389-1401.

104.

Wingood

G. M.

DiClemente

R. J.

Harrington

Davies

Hook

E. W.

M. K.

(2001). Exposure to x-rated movies and adolescents’ sexual and contraceptive-related attitude and behaviors. Pediatrics, 107, 1116-1119.

105.

Wright

P. J.

(2011a). Mass media effects on youth sexual behavior: Assessing the claim for causality. Communication Yearbook, 35, 343-386.

106.

Wright

P. J.

(2011b). U.S. males and pornography, 1973-2010: Consumption, predictors, correlates. Journal of Sex Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/00224499.2011.628132

107.

Wright

P. J.

(2012). A longitudinal analysis of U.S. adults’ pornography exposure: Sexual socialization, selective exposure, and the moderating role of unhappiness. Journal of Media Psychology, 24, 67-76.

108.

Wright

P. J.

(2013). A three-wave longitudinal analysis of preexisting beliefs, exposure to pornography, and attitude change. Communication Reports, 26(1), 13-25.

109.

Wright

P. J.

Arroyo

(in press). Internet pornography and U.S. women’s sexual behavior: Results from a national sample. Mass Communication and Society.

110.

Wright

P. J.

Malamuth

Donnerstein

(2012). Research on sex in the media: What do we know about effects on children and adolescents? In Singer

D. G.

Singer

J. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 273-302). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

111.

Wright

P. J.

Randall

A. K.

(2012). Internet pornography exposure and risky sexual behavior among adult males in the United States. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1410-1416.

112.

Wright

P. J.

Randall

A. K.

Arroyo

(2012). Father-daughter communication about sex moderates the association between exposure to MTV’s 16 and pregnant/teen mom and female students’ pregnancy-risk behavior. Sexuality & Culture. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s12119-012-9137-2

113.

Ybarra

M. L.

Mitchell

K. J.

Hamburger

Diener-West

Leaf

P. J.

(2011). X-rated material and perpetration of sexually aggressive behavior among children and adolescents: Is there a link? Aggressive Behavior, 37, 1-18.

114.

Zillmann

Bryant

(1982). Pornography, sexual callousness, and the trivialization of rape. Journal of Communication, 32, 10-21.

115.

Zillmann

Bryant

(1988). Effects of prolonged consumption of pornography on family values. Journal of Family Issues, 9, 518-544.