ATLG

The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale

The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) Scale is a brief measure of heterosexuals’
attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. The original scale consisted of 20 different statements, 10
about gay men (ATG subscale) and 10 about lesbians (ATL subscale), to which respondents
indicated their level of agreement or disagreement. Shorter versions have subsequently been
developed, consisting of ATG and ATL subscales with parallel versions of 3, 4, or 5 items.
These shorter versions have been found to be highly correlated with the original, longer
subscales (e.g., rs > .95 between 5-item versions of the ATG and ATL and their 10-item
counterparts), and their use is now recommended instead of the original subscales.

Administration
The ATLG can be self-administered (presented on paper or on a computer) or administered
orally (as in a telephone survey). When presented visually, scale items are typically accompanied
by a 5-, 7-, or 9-point Likert-type scale with anchor points of Strongly Disagree and Strongly
Agree. When administered orally during telephone or face-to-face interviews, four response
options are usually offered (Strongly Disagree, Disagree Somewhat, Agree Somewhat, Strongly
Agree), and respondents are allowed to volunteer a middle response (e.g., "Neither Agree nor
Disagree").

If labeling of each response point is desired, it is recommended that a 4- or 5-point scale be used
with the following labels:

 strongly disagree
 disagree somewhat
 neither agree nor disagree (for 5-point scales only)
 agree somewhat
 strongly agree.

For college-educated respondents, each item requires roughly 30-60 seconds.

Scoring
Scoring is accomplished by summing numerical values (e.g., 1 = strongly disagree, 9 = strongly
agree) across items for each subscale. Reverse scoring is used for some items. For ease of
interpretation, the sum of item values can be divided by the total number of items to yield a score
that matches the response scale metric. The possible range of scores depends on the response
scale used.

Scores on the original ATL and ATG subscales, which are based on responses to differently
worded items, were not directly comparable. Researchers wishing to compare respondents’
attitudes toward gay men with their attitudes toward lesbians were advised to use parallel forms
of one subscale (usually the ATG items). The use of such parallel forms (with each item
presented once in reference to gay men and once in reference to lesbians) is now recommended
for all ATLG scale users.

Reliability and Validity

The ATLG subscales have high levels of internal consistency. When self-administered, alpha >
.85 with most college student samples and alpha > .80 with most nonstudent adult samples. For
telephone surveys with oral administration to adult samples, alpha > .80 for 5-item versions
and alpha > .70 for 3-item versions. Test-retest reliability (rs > .80) has been demonstrated with
alternate forms (Herek, 1988, 1994).

Scores on the ATLG subscales are reliably correlated with other theoretically relevant constructs
(e.g., Herek, 1994, 2009; Herek & Capitanio, 1996, 1999a, 1999b). Higher scores are associated
with high religiosity, lack of interpersonal contact with gay men and lesbians, adherence to
traditional gender-role attitudes, belief in a traditional family ideology, and endorsement of
policies that discriminate against sexual minorities. In addition, ATG scores are reliably
correlated with AIDS-related stigma in the United States. The ATLG's discriminant validity also
has been established. Members of lesbian and gay organizations scored at the extreme positive
end of the range, and nonstudent adults who publicly supported a gay rights ballot measure
scored significantly lower on the ATLG than did community residents who publicly opposed the
initiative (Herek, 1988, 1994).

Administration in Other Languages and Outside the United States

The ATLG was developed for administration to English-speaking adult heterosexuals in the
United States. It has also been used in research conducted in England (Hegarty, 2002) and
Canada (Mohipp & Morry, 2004), and translated versions have been administered in the
Netherlands (Meerendonk, Eisinga, & Felling, 2003), Singapore (Detenber et al., 2007), Brazil
(DeSouza, Solberg, & Elder, 2007), Chile (Cardenas & Barrientos, 2008; Nierman, Thompson,
Bryan, & Mahaffey, 2007), and Turkey (Gelbal & Duyan, 2006). In addition, a Spanish-language
version was created for a study of California adults of Mexican descent (Herek & Gonzalez-
Rivera, 2006).

In these studies, scale reliability has been consistently acceptable (typically, alpha > .80), and the
patterns of correlations between ATLG scores and theoretically related constructs have been
similar to those obtained with U.S. English-speaking samples.
Other Information
For a more thorough discussion of the ATLG's development and usage, and item and scale
scores for various samples, see Herek (1994, 1998; Herek & McLemore, 2011).

Permissions
Doctoral-level social and behavioral scientists, as well as students and researchers working under
their supervision, may use the ATLG in not-for-profit research that is consistent with the
American Psychological Association's Ethical Principles of Psychologists. It is not necessary to
obtain formal permission from Dr. Herek to use the scale in research that meets these
conditions, and such permissions are not provided, even upon request. Permission to use the
scale is explicitly denied to individuals who have been expelled or dropped from membership in
a professional or scientific association because of their violation of the organization's ethical
standards.

References

Cardenas, M., & Barrientos, J. (2008). The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale
(ATLG): Adaptation and testing the reliability and validity in Chile. Journal of Sex Research, 45,
140–149.

DeSouza, E., Solberg, J., & Elder, C. (2007). A cross-cultural perspective on judgments of
woman-to-woman sexual harassment: Does sexual orientation matter? Sex Roles, 56, 457–471.

Detenber, B., Cenite, M., Ku, M., Ong, C., Tong, H., & Yeow, M. (2007). Singaporeans’
attitudes toward lesbians and gay men and their tolerance of media portrayals of
homosexuality.International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19, 367–379.

Gelbal, S., & Duyan, V. (2006). Attitudes of university students toward lesbians and gay men in
Turkey. Sex Roles, 55, 573–579.

Hegarty, P. (2002). "It’s not a choice, it’s the way we’re built:: Symbolic beliefs about sexual
orientation in the US and Britain.Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 12,
153–166.

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. (1987a). Can functions be measured? A new perspective on the functional approach
to attitudes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 285-303.

Herek, G.M. (1987b). Religion and prejudice: A comparison of racial and sexual
attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 56-65.

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. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review
of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In B. Greene, & G.M. Herek (Eds.) Lesbian and gay
psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications(pp. 206-228). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Herek, G.M. (1997). The HIV epidemic and public attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. In
M.P. Levine, P. Nardi, & J. Gagnon (Eds.) In changing times: The impact of the HIV epidemic
on the lesbian and gay community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Herek, G. M. (1998). The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) scale. In C.M.
Davis, W.H. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S.L. Davis (Eds.), Sexuality-related
measures: A compendium. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Herek, G.M. (2000). Sexual prejudice and gender: Do heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians
and gay men differ?Journal of Social Issues 56(2), 251-266.

Herek, G.M. (2002). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion
Quarterly 66(1), 40-66.

Herek, G. M. (2009). Sexual stigma and sexual prejudice in the United States: A conceptual
framework. In D. A. Hope (Ed.),Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay and bisexual
identities: The 54th Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 65–111). New York: Springer.

Herek, G.M., & Capitanio, J.P. (1995). Black heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay
men in the United States.Journal of Sex Research, 32, 95-105.

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1996). "Some of my best friends": Intergroup contact,
concealable stigma, and heterosexuals' attitudes toward gay men and lesbians.Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 412-424.

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999a). AIDS stigma and sexual prejudice. American
Behavioral Scientist, 42, 1126-1143.

Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999b). Sex differences in how heterosexuals think about
lesbians and gay men: Evidence from survey context effects. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 348-
360.

Herek, G.M., & Glunt, E.K. (1991). AIDS-related attitudes in the United States: A preliminary
conceptualization. Journal of Sex Research, 28, 99-123.

Herek, G.M., & Glunt, E.K. (1993). Interpersonal contact and heterosexuals' attitudes toward gay
men: Results from a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 239-244.

Herek, G. M., & Gonzalez-Rivera, M. (2006). Attitudes toward homosexuality among U.S.
residents of Mexican descent.Journal of Sex Research, 43, 122-135.
Herek, G. M., & McLemore, K. A. (2011). The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men
(ATLG) scale. In T. Fisher, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of
sexuality-related measures (3rd ed., pp. 415-417). Oxford, England: Taylor & Francis.

Meerendonk, B. van de, Eisinga, R., & Felling, A. (2003). Application of Herek’s Attitudes
Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale in the Netherlands. Psychological Reports, 93, 265–275.

Mohipp, C., & Morry, M. (2004). The relationship of symbolic beliefs and prior contact to
heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbian women. Canadian Journal of Behavioural
Science, 36, 36–44.

Nierman, A. J., Thompson, S., Bryan, A., & Mahaffey, A. (2007). Gender role beliefs and
attitudes toward lesbians and gay men in Chile and the U.S. Sex Roles, 57, 61–67.

Return to Dr. Herek's bibliography

Return to the Sexual Prejudice page