Validez e invariancia de medida de la Escala de Homonegatividad Moderna en alumnado del ámbito de la educación

Abstract

Aquellas investigaciones orientadas a analizar las actitudes hacia la homosexualidad sugieren el uso de instrumentos que detecten los aspectos sutiles en la discriminación hacia hombres gais y mujeres lesbianas. Asimismo, se señala que la invariancia de medida de los constructos es imprescindible para que las comparaciones entre grupos sean válidas. Este trabajo pretende validar la Escala de Homonegatividad Moderna (MHS) en estudiantes universitarios del ámbito de la educación (N = 1.283) con un rango de edad entre los 17 y los 49 años (M = 2.88; DT = 3,02). Del mismo modo, se interesa por examinar la invariancia de medida de la MHS en relación con ciertas variables sociodemográficas y personales (p. ej. identidad de género), así como ideológicas (p. ej. inclinación política). Los resultados aportaron evidencias sobre la unidimensionalidad de la escala y un alto grado de consistencia interna (ωMHS-G = .879; ωMHS-L = .906), además de unos índices de ajuste (CFIMHS-G = .95, CFIMHS-L = .97; RMSEAMHS-G = .064, 90% IC: .057-.071, RMSEAMHS-L = .059, 90% IC: .052-.066) y unos valores de validez externa (MHS-G y AN-T: r = .753, I.C. 95% = .722-.785; MHS-L y AN-T: r = .76. I.C. 95% = .730-.790) satisfactorios. Asimismo, sugirieron que tanto la subescala hacia hombres gais (MHS-G) como mujeres lesbianas (MHS-L) son constructos invariantes conforme a las variables estudiadas. Las conclusiones apuntan a la validez y la invariancia de medida del modelo propuesto para comparar los niveles de homonegatividad moderna entre los grupos estudiados.

Parenting stiles (authoritative, democratic, permissive and neglectful) play a key role in personal development and can be related to aggressive beliefs and affects in the individual. In order to examine this relationship, 769 subjects (359 men; 46.68%), with an average age of 21.89 years, s.d = 2.65, were assessed in terms of parenting styles, aggressive beliefs and affects; the mediating role of affects in the relationship between aggressive beliefs and parenting styles was also explored. The study revealed that these constructs are interrelated. The democratic parenting style was found to be the most widespread. In terms of gender, authoritative styles were used more often on men than on women, among which the permissive style was the most common. No significant gender differences were found concerning democratic and neglectful parenting styles. Women were revealed to be more exposed to negative affects, and aggressive beliefs were found to be more prevalent in men. Children educated according to a democratic style scored higher in positive affects and lower in aggressive beliefs. Authoritative styles tend to lead to above-average scores in positive affects and aggressive beliefs. In addition, one in five people educated according to a permissive style returns a high negative affect score, and one in four people educated according to a neglectful style yields high scores in aggressive beliefs. Finally, parenting styles were found to have a direct effect on aggressive beliefs, an effect enhanced by the mediating role played by affects. In conclusion, the study suggests that parenting styles are related to aggressive beliefs and affects. In addition, affects were shown to play a mediating role in the relationship between parenting styles and aggressive beliefs. Finally, it is worth emphasising that, owing to the far-reaching implications of parenting styles on the psychological, social and personal development of the individual, more research needs to be undertaken, not only to examine their relationship with affects and aggressive beliefs, but also with other psychological variables involved in personal development.