TY - JOUR
T1 - Proposition 8 and homophobic bullying in California
AU - Hatzenbuehler, Mark L.
AU - Shen, Yishan
AU - Vandewater, Elizabeth A.
AU - Russell, Stephen T.
N1 - Funding Information:
FUNDING: The California Healthy Kids Survey was developed by WestEd under contract to the California Department of Education. The authors acknowledge generous support from the Communities for Just Schools Fund Project at the New Venture Fund and the Priscilla Pond Flawn Endowment at The University of Texas at Austin. Support for this research also was provided by grants (R24HD042849 and P2CHD042849) awarded to the Population Research Center at The University of Texas at Austin by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2019 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - BACKGROUND: Bias-based bullying is associated with negative outcomes for youth, but its contextual predictors are largely unknown. Voter referenda that target lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender groups may be 1 contextual factor contributing to homophobic bullying. METHODS: Data come from 14 consecutive waves (2001–2014) of cross-sectional surveys of students participating in the California Healthy Kids Survey (N = 4 977 557). Student responses were aggregated to the school level (n = 5121). Using a quasi-experimental design, we compared rates of homophobic bullying before and after Proposition 8, a voter referendum that restricted marriage to heterosexuals in November 2008. RESULTS: Interrupted time series analyses confirmed that the academic year 2008–2009, during which Proposition 8 was passed, served as a turning point in homophobic bullying. The rate of homophobic bullying increased (blinear = 1.15; P, .001) and accelerated (bquadratic = 0.08; P, .001) in the period before Proposition 8. After Proposition 8, homophobic bullying gradually decreased (blinear = 20.28; P, .05). Specificity analyses showed that these trends were not observed among students who reported that they were bullied because of their race and/or ethnicity, religion, or gender but not because of their sexual orientation. Furthermore, the presence of a protective factor specific to school contexts among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth (gay-straight alliances) was associated with a smaller increase in homophobic bullying pre–Proposition 8. CONCLUSIONS: This research provides some of the first empirical evidence that public campaigns that promote stigma may confer risk for bias-based bullying among youth.
AB - BACKGROUND: Bias-based bullying is associated with negative outcomes for youth, but its contextual predictors are largely unknown. Voter referenda that target lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender groups may be 1 contextual factor contributing to homophobic bullying. METHODS: Data come from 14 consecutive waves (2001–2014) of cross-sectional surveys of students participating in the California Healthy Kids Survey (N = 4 977 557). Student responses were aggregated to the school level (n = 5121). Using a quasi-experimental design, we compared rates of homophobic bullying before and after Proposition 8, a voter referendum that restricted marriage to heterosexuals in November 2008. RESULTS: Interrupted time series analyses confirmed that the academic year 2008–2009, during which Proposition 8 was passed, served as a turning point in homophobic bullying. The rate of homophobic bullying increased (blinear = 1.15; P, .001) and accelerated (bquadratic = 0.08; P, .001) in the period before Proposition 8. After Proposition 8, homophobic bullying gradually decreased (blinear = 20.28; P, .05). Specificity analyses showed that these trends were not observed among students who reported that they were bullied because of their race and/or ethnicity, religion, or gender but not because of their sexual orientation. Furthermore, the presence of a protective factor specific to school contexts among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth (gay-straight alliances) was associated with a smaller increase in homophobic bullying pre–Proposition 8. CONCLUSIONS: This research provides some of the first empirical evidence that public campaigns that promote stigma may confer risk for bias-based bullying among youth.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067218842&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067218842&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1542/peds.2018-2116
DO - 10.1542/peds.2018-2116
M3 - Article
C2 - 31085737
AN - SCOPUS:85067218842
VL - 143
JO - Pediatrics
JF - Pediatrics
SN - 0031-4005
IS - 6
M1 - e20182116
ER -