The following is a brief piece that I wrote several years ago evaluating a research study on whether or not homosexuals could change.
R: 070928
Revision # 2 of Homosexuality Study
Two questions are raised by the media reports that recent research shows that homosexuals can change their orientation: For the first: Is the media accurately reporting the conclusions of this study? Second: Are the conclusions considered to be valid and reliable? This aspect considers what the authors set out to test, how the research was conducted, and whether or not the conclusions were supported by the actual research.
Has the media accurately reported the conclusions of this research?
Here are some of the comments, taken from a larger story in The BAPTIST PRESS, and written by Michael Foust, on September 14, 2007:
In what some are calling groundbreaking research, a new four-year study concludes it is possible for homosexuals to change their physical attractions and become heterosexual through the help of Christian ministries. . . . .
Thirty-eight percent of the subjects followed in the study said they had successfully left homosexuality, while an additional 29 percent said they had had only modest success. . . .
These findings contradict directly the commonly expressed views of the mental health establishment that change in sexual orientation is impossible, and that if you attempt to change it’s highly likely to produce harm for those who make such an attempt,. . . NOTE: This statement is a quote from Jones.
The fact that it is a long-term study makes it superior to the most recent other work in this field.. . .
My comments on the above follow:
1) Groundbreaking & superior: It may well be that this study is superior to any other study that has reached the same conclusion. It may also be groundbreaking I will not argue that point.
2) Change in orientation/physical attraction: The first hypothesis that the authors attempted to test was that it was impossible for a homosexual to change their orientation.. Here is what the authors actually said on this subject:
"First, we did not find that everyone can change. While these findings firmly refute any notion that change of sexual orientation is impossible, saying that change is not impossible in general is not the same thing as saying that everyone can change, that anyone can change or that change is necessarily possible for any given individual.
Second, while we found that part of our research population experienced success to the degree that it might be called (as we have here) ‘conversion,’ our evidence does not indicate that these changes are categorical, resulting in uncomplicated, dichotomous and unequivocal reversal of sexual orientation from utterly homosexual to utterly heterosexual. The change reported was not simple. Most of the individuals who reported that they were heterosexual at Time 3 did not report themselves to be without experience of homosexual arousal, and they did not report heterosexual orientation to be unequivocal and uncomplicated."
I will suggest that we have a clear statement, in the above quotation that homosexual orientation did not change as reported by the media.
3) Media reports of 38 percent success rate: The authors actually report that a 15 percent success rate, at Time 3, which they defined as “substantial reductions in homosexual attraction and functioning.” They then reported that an additional 23 percent were able to live chaste lives “without overt sexual activity.” I will suggest that at best the authors are reporting a 15 percent success rate and not a 38 percent success.
Can this research be considered to be valid and reliable?
1) In my thinking one fundamental flaw is the thinking that orientation may be determined by behavior. If one is able to change their behavior, they are no longer homosexual, even if they are still erotically aroused by homosexual situations. I, and many others take the position that homosexuality is not determined by behavior, but by orientation.
2) The authors of this study make the following statement:
"Those who propose that change is possible almost universally agree that change of sexual orientation is a very slow process, with substantial change taking five years or more to solidify."
However, after stating the above, the authors go on to state that they studied their participants for a maximum of four years, with some studied for lesser amounts of time. I will suggest that while their study is both interesting and important, the fact that they did not follow up for longer periods of time reduces the value of their study. My suggestion is that a study of this nature should take 10 years.
3) Scientific studies typically cannot study a population. Rather they study a sample. It is expected that the sample studied will faithfully represent the population that is considered. The sample in this case consisted of people who wanted to change, and in addition, sought help to change from organizations affiliated with Exodus. Thus, the sample was self-limiting, and in no way can be considered to faithfully represent either the homosexual population or the population of those who wanted to change. It clearly excluded people who may have wanted to change, and sought help to change from programs not affiliated with Exodus. I will acknowledge that it might be impossible to identify a sample that faithfully represented the homosexual population. But, this flaw potentially reduces the validity and reliability of the study.
Even with this admission, problems remain. The authors acknowledge that they cannot be certain that their sample faithfully represents the Exodus population. Rather, they simply state that it is a good snapshot.
4) In a scientific study it is important that all members of the group being studied be given exactly the same course of treatment. The authors acknowledge that different programs to attempt change were used on different subjects. Perhaps this was not important to the purpose of this study. But, it clearly calls into question its reliability, and affects its validity.
5) One major flaw in my thinking is that the authors relied on self-report. As a hospital chaplain I am well aware that patients typically under report their use of alcohol, tobacco and illegal drugs. As this sample was solely comprised of people who wanted to change, I have to assume that their self-report was skewed in the direction that they wanted to go. That is to say that it is skewed in the direction of reporting success in change.
It is believed by many that it is possible to measure change by psychophysiological measures to assess sexual arousal and orientation. The authors of this study rejected this for several reasons. The first is that they did not see this as possible from a practical sense. I agree with them on that. In making that statement I have to say that the validity of this study is reduced.
In addition they question the validity of psychophysiological measurements. They are entitled to hold that view. I will suggest that such a view is not held by the majority of the researchers. These authors fail to make a conclusive case for their position.
They also have taken the position that the most typical method of psychophysiological measurement carries with it certain moral deficits. I understand their position. However, because they rejected this often accepted method of measurement, their validity is reduced.
6) In their measurement of success, the authors established the standard of chastity which they decided was living happily without overt sexual activity. I will suggest that a better measurement would have been a requirement the participants live happily without overt homosexual activity. Although I do not believe that behavior is a good measure for orientation.
7) In homosexual research, one major issue involves the question as to what is homosexuality, and whether or not a subject is actuality homosexual. In this study the authors consider that 45 out of their 98 subjects were “Truly Gay.” This factor reduces the study validity substantiality.
Summation: The authors are to be commended for the research that they have done. As they had a clear bias (God can change orientation) when they began the study, they are to be commended for reporting conclusions which did not perfectly support those conclusions. Exodus is to be commended for funding it. Overall, this study probably did reach a new standard for scientific design when compared with previous studies which purport to show that homosexuals can change their orientation. However, it was not a perfect study. It can be challenged on both validity and on reliability. As such, it should not be said to be conclusive. More research needs to be done.
NOTE: References to the positions of the authors are generally taken from: EX-GAYS? A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF RELIGIOUSLY MEDIATED CHANGE IN SEXUAL ORIENTATION, a paper for the American Association of Christian Counselors (9/07/2007), and posted on the Internet.
Gregory Matthews
