Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
We demonstrate that widely used measures of antigay sentiment and the size of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) population are misestimated, likely substantially. In a series of online experiments using a large and diverse but nonrepresentative sample, we compare estimates from the standard methodology of asking sensitive questions to measures from a “veiled” methodology that precludes inference about an individual but provides population estimates. The veiled method increased self-reports of antigay sentiment, particularly in the workplace: respondents were 67% more likely to disapprove of an openly gay manager when asked with a veil, and 71% more likely to say it should be legal to discriminate in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation. The veiled methodology also produces larger estimates of the fraction of the population that identifies as LGBT or has had a sexual experience with a member of the same sex. Self-reports of nonheterosexual identity rose by 65%, and same-sex sexual experiences by 59%. We conduct a “placebo test” and show that for nonsensitive placebo items, the veiled methodology produces effects that are small in magnitude and not significantly different from zero in seven out of eight items. Taken together, the results suggest antigay discrimination might be a more significant issue than formerly considered, as the nonheterosexual population and antigay workplace-related sentiment are both larger than previously measured. Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2503 . This paper was accepted by Uri Gneezy, behavioral economics.
Coffman et al. (Wed,) studied this question.