Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Prim Prev. 2013 Oct;34(5):359–369. doi: 10.1007/s10935-013-0319-y

Table 3.

Responses to Film Among Parents and Youth Post-Film Assessment (n = 796 parents, 934 youth)

n %
Parents of youth (age ≤ 25) known or suspected to be LGB
 How helpful did you find the film? Not at all helpful 13 1.7
A little bit helpful 70 9.3
Moderately helpful 130 17.2
Very helpful 285 37.7
Extremely helpful 258 34.1
 How confident are you that you can be a good parent to an LGB child? (1=not at all, 2=a little bit, 3=moderately, 4=very, 5=extremely)a Pre film: M = 3.7 (SD = 1.2)
Post film: M = 4.1 (SD = 1.0)
Paired-sample t test comparing pre to post: t(554) = 10.36, p < .0001
 Most common qualitative reactions to the filmb General positive comment (e.g., “Thank you so much for this film!”) 237 66.6
Positive comment about families in the film(e.g., “The families were relatable/honest.” Or “I liked Lauren’s Mom.”) 64 18.0
Request for additional content (e.g., “I would like to see a movie made about siblings of gay youth.”) 43 12.1
Positive comment on LEAD acronym/content (e.g., “LEAD instructions for parents were very helpful.”) 33 9.3
LGB youth (age ≤ 25)
 How likely is it that you will recommend the film to your parents? Definitely not 44 4.9
Probably not 139 15.4
Maybe 270 29.9
Probably yes 244 27.1
Definitely yes 205 22.7
 Most common qualitative reactions to the filmc General positive comment 177 64.4
Positive comment on families in the film 47 17.1
Request for additional content 40 14.5
Want different demographic/group represented in the film (e.g., “Show a family that is more accepting.” or “Why wasn’t there an Asian youth in the film?”) 35 12.7
a

Pre and post questions on parenting self-efficacy were added approximately 1 month into data collection, resulting in smaller numbers of parents who received these questions.

b

A total of 754 comments were obtained from 356 parents. Percentages reflect the proportion of commenting parents who made a given remark (i.e., the denominator for calculating percentages was 356).

c

A total of 640 comments were obtained from 275 youth. Percentages reflect the proportion of commenting youth who made a given remark (i.e., the denominator for calculating percentages was 275).