Fitting the Description
Where the Blame Lies: Unpacking Groups Into Their Constituent Subgroups Shifts Judgments of Blame in Intergroup Conflict
Nir Halevy et al.
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Whom do individuals blame for intergroup conflict? Do people attribute responsibility for intergroup conflict to the in-group or the out-group? Theoretically integrating the literatures on intergroup relations, moral psychology, and judgment and decision-making, we propose that unpacking a group by explicitly describing it in terms of its constituent subgroups increases perceived support for the view that the unpacked group shoulders more of the blame for intergroup conflict. Five preregistered experiments (N = 3,335 adults) found support for this novel hypothesis across three distinct intergroup conflicts: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, current racial tensions between White people and Black people in the United States, and the gender gap in wages in the United States. Our findings (a) highlight the independent roles that entrenched social identities and cognitive, presentation-based processes play in shaping blame judgments, (b) demonstrate that the effect of unpacking groups generalizes across partisans and nonpartisans, and (c) illustrate how constructing packed versus unpacked sets of potential perpetrators can critically shape where the blame lies.
Can Information Reduce Ethnic Discrimination? Evidence from Airbnb
Morgane Laouénan & Roland Rathelot
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, January 2022, Pages 107-132
Abstract:
We use data from Airbnb to identify the mechanisms underlying discrimination against ethnic minority hosts. Within the same neighborhood, hosts from minority groups charge 3.2 percent less for comparable listings. Since ratings provide guests with increasingly rich information about a listing's quality, we can measure the contribution of statistical discrimination, building upon Altonji and Pierret (2001). We find that statistical discrimination can account for the whole ethnic price gap: ethnic gaps would disappear if all unobservables were revealed. Also, three-quarters (2.5 points) of the initial ethnic gap can be attributed to inaccurate beliefs of potential guests about hosts' average group quality.
Minority Versus Minority: Partisanship and Inter-Group Competitions Among Asian Americans
Dongshu Liu & Nathan Carrington
American Politics Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
Increasingly salient in democratic politics are the divides among political parties regarding how they mobilize supports between ethnic majorities and minorities. Why, then, do some members of a minority group support political parties that seem antithetical to the interests of minority groups? We draw on group conflict theory to suggest that a partial explanation rests on perceived competition within minority groups. We test this theory by focusing on Republican Party support among Asian Americans in the United States. Based on two representative surveys and an original online survey experiment of Asian Americans, we demonstrate that perceived competition among racial minority groups has a significant effect on the partisanship of Asian American and pushes them toward the Republican Party. We also present observational evidence suggesting our theory applies to other minority groups. Our findings provide critical implications on how race affects politics in democracies with increasingly diversified ethnic minority groups.
The threat of a majority-minority U.S. alters white Americans' perception of race
Amy Krosch et al.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Racial minorities will soon outnumber white Americans in the U.S. Prior research suggests that this demographic shift is likely to increase white peoples' feelings of threat and anti-minority discrimination. But might this demographic shift also alter who is considered a minority in the first place? We tested whether knowledge of an impending “majority-minority” shift in the U.S. would increase threat to white status, leading white perceivers to see mixed-race faces as minorities rather than white — a strategy historically used to preserve white status in the American racial hierarchy. In an initial correlational study, white participants who self-reported greater white status threat perceived mixed-race faces as more Latino than white (Study 1). As compared to those in a control condition, white participants in Studies 2–5 who read about the U.S. demographic shift reported greater white status threat and exhibited reduced perceptual thresholds for categorizing mixed-race faces as Latino, Black, and “not white.” A mediation analysis across studies suggests that the status threat white participants experienced from the demographic shift may have lowered their threshold for seeing mixed-race faces as minorities. Our results indicate that the threat of demographic change alters race perception in a manner that increases the number of people who are seen as minorities and who are, therefore, more vulnerable to discrimination.
Empathy-based counterspeech can reduce racist hate speech in a social media field experiment
Dominik Hangartner et al.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 14 December 2021
Abstract:
Despite heightened awareness of the detrimental impact of hate speech on social media platforms on affected communities and public discourse, there is little consensus on approaches to mitigate it. While content moderation — either by governments or social media companies — can curb online hostility, such policies may suppress valuable as well as illicit speech and might disperse rather than reduce hate speech. As an alternative strategy, an increasing number of international and nongovernmental organizations (I/NGOs) are employing counterspeech to confront and reduce online hate speech. Despite their growing popularity, there is scant experimental evidence on the effectiveness and design of counterspeech strategies (in the public domain). Modeling our interventions on current I/NGO practice, we randomly assign English-speaking Twitter users who have sent messages containing xenophobic (or racist) hate speech to one of three counterspeech strategies — empathy, warning of consequences, and humor — or a control group. Our intention-to-treat analysis of 1,350 Twitter users shows that empathy-based counterspeech messages can increase the retrospective deletion of xenophobic hate speech by 0.2 SD and reduce the prospective creation of xenophobic hate speech over a 4-wk follow-up period by 0.1 SD. We find, however, no consistent effects for strategies using humor or warning of consequences. Together, these results advance our understanding of the central role of empathy in reducing exclusionary behavior and inform the design of future counterspeech interventions.
New label, different identity? Three experiments on the uniqueness of Latinx
Bianca Vicuña & Efrén Pérez
Politics, Groups, and Identities, forthcoming
Abstract:
Groups use labels to define what communities stand for. Yet sometimes multiple labels refer to the same group (e.g., Hispanic, Latino). Do different labels generate distinct political opinions? Some work suggests that assorted labels evoke substantively similar views, since the attributes that define group members are highly correlated across categories. Other work, though, implies that varied labels can alter the configuration of group attributes in a way that elicits unique attitudes. We use these insights to evaluate Latinx: a new pan-ethnic label said to imply more gender-inclusive views. In three experiments, we randomly allocated Latino adults to report attributes that make them unique individuals (control) versus Latinx, Latino, or Hispanic. Assignment to the Latinx condition consistently increased participants’ support for pro-LGBTQ policies, an effect that was most precisely estimated in a meta-analysis of all three experiments. These results suggest that Latinx yields meaningful shifts in gender-inclusive opinions, consistent with claims about this label’s nature. We discuss our results’ implications for ongoing debates about Latinos’ self-designations.
Copy the In-group: Group Membership Trumps Perceived Reliability, Warmth, and Competence in a Social-Learning Task
Marcel Montrey & Thomas Shultz
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Surprisingly little is known about how social groups influence social learning. Although several studies have shown that people prefer to copy in-group members, these studies have failed to resolve whether group membership genuinely affects who is copied or whether group membership merely correlates with other known factors, such as similarity and familiarity. Using the minimal-group paradigm, we disentangled these effects in an online social-learning game. In a sample of 540 adults, we found a robust in-group-copying bias that (a) was bolstered by a preference for observing in-group members; (b) overrode perceived reliability, warmth, and competence; (c) grew stronger when social information was scarce; and (d) even caused cultural divergence between intermixed groups. These results suggest that people genuinely employ a copy-the-in-group social-learning strategy, which could help explain how inefficient behaviors spread through social learning and how humans maintain the cultural diversity needed for cumulative cultural evolution.
Are Americans less likely to reply to emails from Black people relative to White people?
Ray Block et al.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 28 December 2021
Abstract:
In this article, we present the results from a large-scale field experiment designed to measure racial discrimination among the American public. We conducted an audit study on the general public — sending correspondence to 250,000 citizens randomly drawn from public voter registration lists. Our within-subjects experimental design tested the public’s responsiveness to electronically delivered requests to volunteer their time to help with completing a simple task — taking a survey. We randomized whether the request came from either an ostensibly Black or an ostensibly White sender. We provide evidence that in electronic interactions, on average, the public is less likely to respond to emails from people they believe to be Black (rather than White). Our results give us a snapshot of a subtle form of racial bias that is systemic in the United States. What we term everyday or “paper cut” discrimination is exhibited by all racial/ethnic subgroups — outside of Black people themselves — and is present in all geographic regions in the United States. We benchmark paper cut discrimination among the public to estimates of discrimination among various groups of social elites. We show that discrimination among the public occurs more frequently than discrimination observed among elected officials and discrimination in higher education and the medical sector but simultaneously, less frequently than discrimination in housing and employment contexts. Our results provide a window into the discrimination that Black people in the United States face in day-to-day interactions with their fellow citizens.
Young children form generalized attitudes based on a single encounter with an outgroup member
Chengfei Yu et al.
Developmental Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
The goal of the present research was to assess whether children's first interaction with a single outgroup member can significantly impact their general attitudes toward the outgroup as a whole. In two preregistered studies, 5- to 6-year-old Chinese children (total N = 147) encountered a Black adult from another country for the very first time, and they played a game together. General attitudes toward the outgroup were assessed using both implicit and explicit measures. In both studies, the interaction resulted in less negative explicit attitudes toward Black people, but more negative implicit attitudes. The results demonstrate for the first time that one encounter with a single outgroup member can impact children's general attitudes toward that group, and that it can have differential effects on implicit and explicit attitudes.
Danger or dislike: Distinguishing threat from negative valence as sources of automatic anti-Black bias
David March, Lowell Gaertner & Michael Olson
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, November 2021, Pages 984–1004
Abstract:
The Dual Implicit Process Model (March et al., 2018b) distinguishes the implicit processing of physical threat (i.e., “Can it hurt or kill me?”) from valence (i.e., “Do I dislike/like it?”). Five studies tested whether automatic anti-Black bias is due to White Americans associating Black men with threat, negative valence, or both. Studies 1 and 2 assessed how quickly White participants decided whether positive, negative, and threatening images were good versus bad when primed by Black versus White male-faces. Studies 3 and 4 assessed how early in the decision process White participants began deciding whether Black and White (and, in Study 3, Asian) male-faces displaying anger, sadness, happiness, or no emotion were, in Study 3, dangerous, depressed, cheerful, or calm or, in Study 4, dangerous, negative, or positive. Study 5 assessed how quickly White participants decided whether negative and threatening words were negative versus dangerous when primed by Black versus White male-names. All studies indicated that White Americans automatically associate Black men with physical threat. Study 3 indicated the association is unique to Black men and did not extend to Asian men as a general intergroup effect. Studies 3, 4, and 5, which simultaneously paired threat against negativity, indicated that the Black-threat association is stronger than a Black-negative association.
What Might Books Be Teaching Young Children About Gender?
Molly Lewis et al.
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
We investigated how gender is represented in children’s books using a novel 200,000-word corpus comprising 247 popular, contemporary books for young children. Using adult human judgments and word co-occurrence data, we quantified gender biases of words in individual books and in the whole corpus. We found that children’s books contain many words that adults judge as gendered. Semantic analyses based on co-occurrence data yielded word clusters related to gender stereotypes (e.g., feminine: emotions; masculine: tools). Co-occurrence data also indicated that many books instantiate gender stereotypes identified in other research (e.g., girls are better at reading, and boys are better at math). Finally, we used large-scale data to estimate the gender distribution of the audience for individual books, and we found that children are more often exposed to stereotypes for their own gender. Together, the data suggest that children’s books may be an early source of gender associations and stereotypes.
Prejudice norms in online gaming: Game context and gamer identification as predictors of the acceptability of prejudice
Lindsay Cary & Alison Chasteen
Psychology of Popular Media, forthcoming
Abstract:
Video games are an increasingly popular form of entertainment. However, despite declining acceptability in many social contexts, prejudiced behavior remains common in online gaming. We explore the possibility that prejudiced behavior is more normative in video games than in the real world by comparing people’s perceptions of the norms across these contexts. In Study 1, we demonstrate that prejudiced behavior is more normative in online video games than in the real world. In Study 2, we show that not all video games are equal — prejudiced behavior is perceived as more common and less offensive in action and role-playing games than puzzle games or face-to-face interactions. This research suggests that norms about prejudiced behavior are different in online gaming than in other contexts; interventions targeted to genres where prejudiced behavior is most frequent and accepted may be effective at shifting social norms and by doing so, reducing prejudiced speech in these contexts.