Attitude Function Inventory (AFI)

Abstract

The Attitude Function Inventory (AFI) is a specialized psychological instrument designed to assess the underlying attitude function served by an individual’s stance toward lesbians and gay men. Developed primarily by Gregory M. Herek, the AFI moves beyond simply measuring the valence (positive or negative) of an attitude to explore why that attitude is held. This scale is rooted in the functional theory of attitudes, positing that attitudes serve specific psychological needs, such as expressing values or defending the self against internal anxieties. By identifying these motivational bases, the AFI provides critical insight for researchers aiming to understand the complexity and resistance to change inherent in prejudice.

Keywords

Attitude Function Inventory, AFI, attitude function, functional approach, social psychology, prejudice, heterosexism, attitudes toward gays and lesbians, psychological measurement, Gregory M. Herek.

Authors

Gregory M. Herek (primary developer), Zachary L. Tureau (utilized the instrument in doctoral research).

Purpose

The primary purpose of the AFI is to determine the psychological utility that attitudes toward lesbians and gay men fulfill for the individual respondent. Unlike traditional measures focusing solely on the content or intensity of prejudice, the AFI identifies whether the attitude serves an experiential-schematic, social-expressive, defensive, or value-expressive function.

Understanding the underlying attitude function is crucial for developing effective interventions aimed at attitude change, as persuasive strategies must be tailored to the specific psychological needs the attitude satisfies. For instance, an attitude serving a defensive function requires different persuasive tactics than one serving a value-expressive function.

Construct

The AFI measures four distinct attitude functions, derived from the functional theory pioneered in social psychology. These functions explain the motivational bases of an attitude rather than the attitude object itself.

The AFI specifically targets attitudes concerning homosexuality and identifies these four motivational bases: Experiential-Schematic (attitudes based on personal experience and knowledge structure), Social-Expressive (attitudes used to identify with or gain approval from significant social groups), Defensive (attitudes that protect the self from internal threats or anxieties, often related to unresolved conflicts), and Value-Expressive (attitudes that express core moral beliefs and fundamental values, particularly those related to morality and tradition).

Validity

The extensive research conducted by Gregory M. Herek (1984, 1987) confirms the construct validity of the AFI. This validity is established through consistent factor structures across various samples, which successfully map onto the four theoretical attitude functions.

Furthermore, the scale exhibits discriminant validity, showing that the different functional subscales are distinct and contribute uniquely to predicting behavior and other psychological outcomes related to prejudice and heterosexism. Studies using the AFI often correlate the functional scores with measures of personality, social norms, and behavioral intentions to confirm its robust theoretical grounding.

Reliability

The AFI demonstrates internal consistency across its four subscales, though the reliability varies depending on the specific function measured and the sample cohort utilized:

• Experiential-Schematic: Alpha coefficients range from 0.67 to 0.82.
• Social-Expressive: Alpha coefficients range from 0.41 to 0.62. This subscale often exhibits the lowest internal consistency, possibly reflecting the situational nature of social signaling.
• Defensive: Alpha coefficients range from 0.72 to 0.82.
• Value-Expressive: Alpha coefficients range from 0.53 to 0.61.

Researchers recommend careful interpretation of the Social-Expressive and Value-Expressive subscales in clinical or highly specific research contexts due to their tendency toward lower average internal consistency scores.

Factor Analysis

The development of the AFI relied heavily on exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to isolate the four distinct functional dimensions of attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. The analysis consistently supports a four-factor solution, corresponding to the theoretical divisions of the functional approach: Experiential-Schematic, Social-Expressive, Defensive, and Value-Expressive.

Each item in the AFI is meticulously designed to load primarily onto one of these factors, ensuring that the resulting scores accurately represent the specific psychological mechanism driving the attitude, thereby validating the scale’s utility in differentiating motivational sources of opinion.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report inventory

Format: Multi-item, 9-point Likert scale response format.

Language Available: English

Population Group: Heterosexual individuals

Age Group: Adults (frequently used with college student populations)

Population Details: Primarily used in research settings with heterosexual adults to assess the functional underpinnings of heterosexist attitudes.

Test Methodology: Respondents indicate the degree to which each statement is true of them, typically ranging from 1 (“Very True of Me”) to 9 (“Not at all True of Me”). The statements quantify the extent to which their opinions about gay men and lesbians are based on specific functional drivers.

Keywords

Psychometrics, attitude measurement, prejudice, social psychology, functional theory, Gregory M. Herek, scale development, sexual orientation, homophobia, internal consistency.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not universally published for the primary author at the time of the scale’s development.)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Refer to primary author’s current institutional affiliation for contact details.)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Refer to Gregory M. Herek’s academic institution, historically the University of California, Davis.)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Attitude Function Inventory was developed and validated primarily in the mid-1980s, with key psychometric publications appearing in 1987 (Herek, 1987). The scale is widely used in academic research and is generally available for non-commercial research purposes, provided appropriate citation is given to the original author, Gregory M. Herek.

The original PDF for an instrument related to this work can be downloaded here: http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc4286/m2/1/high_res_d/dissertation.pdf

Reference’s

• Herek, G. M. (1984). Attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A factor-analytic study. Journal of Homosexuality, 10(1-2), 39-51.
• Herek, G. M. (1984). Beyond “homophobia”: A social psychological perspective on attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 10(1/2), 1-21.
• Herek, G. M. (1986a). The instrumentality of attitudes: Toward a neofunctional theory. Journal of Social Issues, 42, 99-114.
• Herek, G. M. (1986b). On heterosexual masculinity. American Behavioral Scientist, 29, 563-577.
• Herek, G. M. (1987). Can functions be measured? A new perspective on the functional approach to attitudes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 285-303.
• Herek, G. M. (1988). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. Journal of Sex Research, 25, 451-477.
• Herek, G. M. (1990). The context of anti-gay violence: Notes on cultural and psychological heterosexism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 316-333.
• Herek, G. M. (2002). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 40-66.
• Tureau, Zachary L. (2003). College Student Identity and Attitudes Toward Gays and Lesbians. doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas.

Items of the Attitude Function Inventory (AFI)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on whether or not someone I care about is gay.
2. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on my personal experiences with specific gay persons.
3. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on my own judgment of how likely it is that I will interact with gay people in any significant way.
4. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on my personal experiences with people whose family members or friends are gay.
5. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on my perceptions of how the people I care about have responded to gay people as a group.
6. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on learning how gay people are viewed by the people whose opinions I most respect.
7. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on the fact that I would rather not think about homosexuality or gay people.
8. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on my personal feelings of discomfort or revulsion at homosexuality.
9. My opinions about gay men and lesbians are based on my concern that we safeguard the civil liberties of all people in our society
10. My opinions about gay men and lesbians mainly are based on my moral beliefs about how things should be.

Response Format: Very True of Me 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Not at all True of Me