Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 20, 2025

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
Published on: June 3, 2013
Perceptions of Protection under Nondiscrimination Law
1Associate Professor of Law, Columbia Law School. Associate Professor of Population & Family Health, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University. J.D., Yale Law School; D.Phil., University of Oxford. This research was funded by K01-MH093273 from the National Institute of Mental Health. I am grateful to the study participants for sharing their thoughts and experiences. I am also grateful to the peer reviewers and commentators at the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics Health Law Professors Conference; the Behavioral Law and Economics conference; the Columbia Faculty Workshop; the Harvard Health Law Workshop; the Mailman School Department of Population & Family Health; the Penn State Health Services Research Colloquium; and the Regional Health Law Works-in-Progress Retreat for valuable feedback on this work. I thank Leo Beletsky, I. Glenn Cohen, Carl Coleman, Mark Hatzenuehler, Suzanne Goldberg, Bert Huang, Craig Konnoth, Terry McGovern, Adam Muchmore, Govind Persad, and Brian Sheppard for helpful comments and discussion. I am grateful to Kenneth H. Mayer, Don Operario, Kate Guthrie, Peter Salovey, Christopher Kahler, and Sarah K. Calabrese for guidance and collaboration on the K01 study that included this survey. All errors herein are my own.
Abstract:
Nondiscrimination rules-statutes, regulations, and soft law protections-are critical for reducing health and health care disparities. Although scholarship has interrogated how nondiscrimination rules affect behavior by discriminators, comparatively little has considered how protections can affect choices made by members of protected groups. A number of states and some interpretations of federal law protect people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. This Article seeks to identify relationships between actual state law, perceived state law, and experiences of discrimination and medical mistrust. This Article reports the results of a national cross-sectional survey of over 3,000 men using Grindr to meet male partners. Participants scored comparable to chance in knowledge about state nondiscrimination protections, with "optimistic errors" (erroneous beliefs that one was protected) significantly more common than pessimistic errors. Perceptions of protection were significantly correlated with lower medical mistrust and greater uptake of care, as well as lower perceived barriers to disclosure and care-seeking. Actual state law protections, however, were significant predictors of having had discussions with providers that depended on disclosure of sexual behavior or orientation. Building on these results, this Article considers pathways by which nondiscrimination law may exert welcome mat (and "unwelcome mat") effects.
Related Concept Videos
Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
Stereotype Threat and Self-fulfilling Prophecies
Nurses' Legal Responsibilities III
Cultivating a culture of collaboration and mutual respect among nurses transcends mere enhancement...
Stereotype Content Model
Factors Influencing Attraction II: Physical Attraction
Ethnic Identity within a Larger Culture

