The violation of equal variance assumption was addressed in two ways: first, the

large sample size functions to counteract the effects of the assumption on the type I error

rate, and second, post-hoc analyses were chosen to take the violation into account. The

Tamhane test is considered one of the more conservative tests when the equal error

variance assumption has been violated (Green & Salkind, 2003) and adjusts the degrees

of freedom to account for the violation. For the multiple comparison tests, the difference

between the mean disability sub-scale score and that for race, religion, and sexual

orientation was statistically significant p < .001. The difference between disability and

gender was not statistically significant.

 Participants taking the Modified Hate Crime Survey (MHCS) agreed with

categorizing a crime as a bias crime less often when the crime was committed against a

person with a disability (M= 26.32, SD = 5.13, Range = 8 to 35, 95% CI25.57 to 27.07),

than when the bias crime scenario was committed against a person because of sexual

orientation (M= 28.79, SD= 4.40, Range = 16 to 35, 95% CI28.15 to 29.43), religion (M

= 31.00, SD = 3.76, Range = 14 to 35, 95% CI 38.52 to 23.48), or race (M= 32.86, SD =

3.07, Range = 20 to 35, 95% CI 32.42 to 33.31). The mean response for gender was

similar to disability in terms of mean score, variability and range of responses (M=

25.68, SD = 5.72, Range = 9 to 35, 95% CI 24.85 to 26.52). (See Figure 4.1)