ABSTRACT
This comment combines the perspectives of 14 researchers in the social and behavioral sciences from diverse backgrounds who have serious concerns about Spitzer’s study on sexual orientation change through “reparative interventions.” In his article, he reviewed research on sexual orientation change through reparative interventions, noting policies and position statements of key institutions, and deficiencies in previous studies. Spitzer recruited 143 men and 57 women based on their assertions that they had changed their homosexual orientation to a predominantly heterosexual orientation. Subjects were recruited through their therapists, pro-change religious ministries, and targeted advertising. He then assessed these individuals about their pre-and post-reparative intervention sexual interests using a structured telephone interview. The main study finding is self-fulfilling: Participants selected through this sampling strategy reported changes that were the basis of their recruitment into the study.
