Outgroup
Matt Ryan & Peter Leeson
International Review of Law and Economics, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper is the first to investigate the relationship between hate groups and hate crime empirically. We do so using panel data for the U.S. states between 2002 and 2008. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find little evidence that hate groups are associated with hate crime in the United States. We find somewhat stronger evidence that economic hardship may be related to hate crime. However, evidence for the potential importance of economic factors remains weak. Further, we find that demographic variables are not significantly related to hate crime in the United States. Our results leave the question of what factors may drive hate crime in America unresolved. But they cast doubt on the popular perception that hate groups are among them.
----------------------
Julia Becker, Ulrich Wagner & Oliver Christ
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, November 2011, Pages 871-885
Abstract:
Why do societal crises often lead to intergroup conflict? We propose that the interplay of unspecific threat and causal attributions differentially predicts increases in ethnic prejudice and anti-Semitism. We tested this hypothesis in the context of the 2008 financial crisis. The results of Study 1 (N = 890) demonstrated on the basis of representative survey data that threat elicited by the financial crisis was related with ethnic prejudice once the cause was attributed to immigrants, whereas it was related with anti-Semitism once the cause of the crisis was attributed to bankers and speculators. In Study 2 (N = 157), we experimentally manipulated threat and type of causal attributions and replicated the results of Study 1. Moreover, we found that regardless of the threat manipulation, participants did not respond with increased prejudice against out-groups if a system-level explanation for the crisis, namely the economic system, was salient.
----------------------
Prime and prejudice: Co-occurrence in the culture as a source of automatic stereotype priming
Paul Verhaeghen, Shelley Aikman & Ana Van Gulick
British Journal of Social Psychology, September 2011, Pages 501-518
Abstract:
It has been argued that stereotype priming (response times are faster for stereotypical word pairs, such as black-poor, than for non-stereotypical word pairs, such as black-balmy) is partially a function of biases in the belief system inherent in the culture. In three priming experiments, we provide direct evidence for this position, showing that stereotype priming effects associated with race, gender, and age can be very well explained through objectively measured associative co-occurrence of prime and target in the culture: (a) once objective associative strength between word pairs is taken into account, stereotype priming effects disappear; (b) the relationship between response time and associative strength is identical for social primes and non-social primes. The correlation between associative-value-controlled stereotype priming and self-report measures of racism, sexism, and ageism is near zero. The racist/sexist/ageist in all of us appears to be (at least partially) a reflection of the surrounding culture.
----------------------
When Closing the Human-Animal Divide Expands Moral Concern: The Importance of Framing
Brock Bastian et al.
Social Psychological and Personality Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Humans and animals share many similarities. Across three studies, the authors demonstrate that the framing of these similarities has significant consequences for people's moral concern for others. Comparing animals to humans expands moral concern and reduces speciesism; however, comparing humans to animals does not appear to produce these same effects. The authors find these differences when focusing on natural tendencies to frame human-animal similarities (Study 1) and following experimental induction of framings (Studies 2 and 3). In Study 3, the authors extend their focus from other animals to marginalized human outgroups, demonstrating that human-animal similarity framing also has consequences for the extension of moral concern to other humans. The authors explain these findings by reference to previous work examining the effects of framing on judgments of similarity and self-other comparisons and discuss them in relation to the promotion of animal welfare and the expansion of moral concern.
----------------------
"Man's best friend:" How the presence of a dog reduces mental distress after social exclusion
Nilüfer Aydin et al.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
A substantial amount of research shows that social exclusion is a threat to mental health. In the research reported here, we tested the hypothesis that the presence of a companion animal can serve as a buffer against these adverse effects. In a controlled laboratory experiment, we found that only socially excluded participants who did not work in the presence of a dog reported lower mental well-being compared with socially excluded participants who performed in the presence of a dog and participants who were not socially excluded. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.
----------------------
When a new group identity does harm on the spot: Stereotype threat in newly created groups
Sarah Martiny et al.
European Journal of Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
The detrimental consequences of negative stereotypes on performance have been demonstrated in a variety of social groups with various stereotypes. The present studies investigate the minimal conditions for stereotype threat using newly created groups. Results of three experiments (total N = 184) demonstrate that in the negative stereotype condition, the more participants identified with their novel group, the stronger was their decrease in performance. In the control condition, identification was either not related to performance, or it had by trend a positive effect. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed with regard to stereotype threat and social identity theory.
----------------------
Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide?
Lasana Harris & Susan Fiske
Zeitschrift für Psychologie, Fall 2011, Pages 175-181
Abstract:
Dehumanized perception, a failure to spontaneously consider the mind of another person, may be a psychological mechanism facilitating inhumane acts like torture. Social cognition - considering someone's mind - recognizes the other as a human being subject to moral treatment. Social neuroscience has reliably shown that participants normally activate a social-cognition neural network to pictures and thoughts of other people; our previous work shows that parts of this network uniquely fail to engage for traditionally dehumanized targets (homeless persons or drug addicts; see Harris & Fiske, 2009, for review). This suggests participants may not consider these dehumanized groups' minds. Study 1 demonstrates that participants do fail to spontaneously think about the contents of these targets' minds when imagining a day in their life, and rate them differently on a number of human-perception dimensions. Study 2 shows that these human-perception dimension ratings correlate with activation in brain regions beyond the social-cognition network, including areas implicated in disgust, attention, and cognitive control. These results suggest that disengaging social cognition affects a number of other brain processes and hints at some of the complex psychological mechanisms potentially involved in atrocities against humanity.
----------------------
Juan Madera & Michelle Hebl
Journal of Applied Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Drawing from theory and research on perceived stigma (Pryor, Reeder, Yeadon, & Hesson-McInnis, 2004), attentional processes (Rinck & Becker, 2006), working memory (Baddeley & Hitch, 1974), and regulatory resources (Muraven & Baumeister, 2000), the authors examined discrimination against facially stigmatized applicants and the processes involved. In Study 1, 171 participants viewed a computer-mediated interview of an applicant who was facially stigmatized or not and who either did or did not acknowledge the stigma. The authors recorded participants' (a) time spent looking at the stigma (using eye tracker technology), (b) ratings of the applicant, (c) memory recall about the applicant, and (d) self-regulatory depletion. Results revealed that the participants with facially stigmatized applicants attended more to the cheek (i.e., where the stigma was placed), which led participants to recall fewer interview facts, which in turn led to lower applicant ratings. In addition, the participants with the stigmatized (vs. nonstigmatized) applicant depleted more regulatory resources. In Study 2, 38 managers conducted face-to-face interviews with either a facially stigmatized or nonstigmatized applicant, and then rated the applicant. Results revealed that managers who interviewed a facially stigmatized applicant (vs. a nonstigmatized applicant) rated the applicant lower, recalled less information about the interview, and depleted more self-regulatory resources.
----------------------
Costly punishment prevails in intergroup conflict
Lauri Sääksvuori, Tapio Mappes & Mikael Puurtinen
Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, 22 November 2011, Pages 3428-3436
Abstract:
Understanding how societies resolve conflicts between individual and common interests remains one of the most fundamental issues across disciplines. The observation that humans readily incur costs to sanction uncooperative individuals without tangible individual benefits has attracted considerable attention as a proximate cause as to why cooperative behaviours might evolve. However, the proliferation of individually costly punishment has been difficult to explain. Several studies over the last decade employing experimental designs with isolated groups have found clear evidence that the costs of punishment often nullify the benefits of increased cooperation, rendering the strong human tendency to punish a thorny evolutionary puzzle. Here, we show that group competition enhances the effectiveness of punishment so that when groups are in direct competition, individuals belonging to a group with punishment opportunity prevail over individuals in a group without this opportunity. In addition to competitive superiority in between-group competition, punishment reduces within-group variation in success, creating circumstances that are highly favourable for the evolution of accompanying group-functional behaviours. We find that the individual willingness to engage in costly punishment increases with tightening competitive pressure between groups. Our results suggest the importance of intergroup conflict behind the emergence of costly punishment and human cooperation.
----------------------
Our Flaws Are More Human Than Yours: Ingroup Bias in Humanizing Negative Characteristics
Peter Koval et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Four studies investigated whether people tend to see ingroup flaws as part of human nature (HN) to a greater degree than outgroup flaws. In Study 1, people preferentially ascribed high HN flaws to their ingroup relative to two outgroups. Study 2 demonstrated that flaws were rated higher on HN when attributed to the ingroup than when attributed to an outgroup, and no such difference occurred for positive traits. Study 3 replicated this humanizing ingroup flaws (HIF) effect and showed that it was (a) independent of desirability and (b) specific to the HN sense of humanness. Study 4 replicated the results of Study 3 and demonstrated that the HIF effect is amplified under ingroup identity threat. Together, these findings show that people humanize ingroup flaws and preferentially ascribe high HN flaws to the ingroup. These ingroup humanizing biases may serve a group-protective function by mitigating ingroup flaws as "only human."
----------------------
A meta-analysis of the effects of speakers' accents on interpersonal evaluations
Jairo Fuertes et al.
European Journal of Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper reports a meta-analysis of the empirical literature on the effects of speakers' accents on interpersonal evaluations. Our review of the published literature uncovered 20 studies that have compared the effects of standard accents (i.e., the accepted accent of the majority population) versus non-standard accents (i.e., accents that are considered foreign or spoken by minorities) on evaluations about the speakers. These 20 studies yielded 116 independent effect sizes on an array of characteristics that were selected by the original researchers. We classified each of the characteristics as belonging to one of three domains that have been traditionally discussed in this area, namely status (e.g., intelligence, social class), solidarity (trustworthiness, in-group-out-group member), and dynamism (level of activity and liveliness). The effect was particularly strong when American Network accented speakers were compared with non-standard-accented speakers. These results underscore prior research showing that speakers' accents have powerful effects on how others perceive them. These and other results are discussed in the context of the literature along with implications for future research in this area.
----------------------
Perceived Group Threat and Punitive Attitudes in Russia and The United States
Darren Wheelock, Olga Semukhina & Nicolai Demidov
British Journal of Criminology, November 2011, Pages 937-959
Abstract:
Extant research has examined the link between the group threat thesis and different forms of social control including the public desire to punish criminals. The group threat thesis posits that crime control, and public support for it, stems from conflict and competition between groups over scarce social resources such as jobs and education. Groups in power utilize crime control to manage and suppress groups that pose a threat to these resources. This perspective has been important in shaping criminological understandings of punishment; however, much of it has focused solely on inter-group conflict in the United States and Western Europe. This study expands the group threat lens by testing whether dynamics of group conflict and threat fuel the desire to punish in Russia. We find that, similarly to the United States and Western Europe, perceived threat is an important predictor of the desire to punish for Russian respondents. The findings draw attention to the need for further investigation of group threat theory in a comparative context.
----------------------
Ángel Gómez et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, December 2011, Pages 1574-1586
Abstract:
When people are ostrasized (i.e., rejected and excluded) by either an outgroup or an ingroup, they may either withdraw or engage in compensatory activities designed to reaffirm their social identity as a group member. The authors proposed here that individual differences in identity fusion (an index of familial orientation toward the group) would moderate the tendency for people to display such compensatory activity. Consistent with this reasoning, the results of four experiments showed that irrevocable ostracism increased endorsement of extreme, pro-group actions (fighting and dying for the ingroup) among fused persons but not among nonfused persons. This effect emerged when an outgroup ostracized fused individuals due either to their nationality (Experiment 1) or their personal preferences (Experiment 2). Similarly, ostracism by the ingroup amplified the tendency for fused persons to both endorse extreme pro-group actions, refuse to leave the group (Experiment 3), and donate money to an ingroup member (Experiment 4). Finally, compensatory activities emerged even when ostracism was based on being "too good" for the group, suggesting that a desire for self-enhancement does not mediate such activities (Experiment 4).
----------------------
Mikael Hjerm & Kikuko Nagayoshi
International Sociology, November 2011, Pages 815-843
Abstract:
This article sets out to develop a classical theme of empirical research within group threat theory, namely the argument that the size of the minority population threatens the majority population. To be able to clarify the mixed empirical results within this version of group threat theory, the article focuses on the composition of the immigrant population. The article tests both objective sources of cultural threats (linguistic composition and the Muslim population) and economic threats (the proportion of working-class individuals and the unemployed among the immigrant population). The study concludes that, first, the composition of the immigrant population is of utter importance for the size argument to be valid for cultural threats (proportion of Muslim population), whereas for economic threats it does not matter. Second, compositional economic threats matter strongly to the group that genuinely competes for scarce resources - the working class is more xenophobic when the immigrant working class is large. Third, the study brings some clarity with regard to the cultural composition of the immigrant population: it is shown that the relationship between Muslims and European majority populations mirrors the relationship between whites and African-Americans in the US.
----------------------
Bounded Empathy: Neural Responses to Outgroup Targets' (Mis)fortunes
Mina Cikara & Susan Fiske
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, December 2011, Pages 3791-3803
Abstract:
The current study investigates whether mere stereotypes are sufficient to modulate empathic responses to other people's (mis)fortunes, how these modulations manifest in the brain, and whether affective and neural responses relate to endorsing harm against different outgroup targets. Participants feel least bad when misfortunes befall envied targets and worst when misfortunes befall pitied targets, as compared with ingroup targets. Participants are also least willing to endorse harming pitied targets, despite pitied targets being outgroup members. However, those participants who exhibit increased activation in functionally defined insula/middle frontal gyrus when viewing pity targets experience positive events not only report feeling worse about those events but also more willing to harm pity targets in a tradeoff scenario. Similarly, increased activation in anatomically defined bilateral anterior insula, in response to positive events, predicts increased willingness to harm envy targets, but decreased willingness to harm ingroup targets, above and beyond self-reported affect in response to the events. Stereotypes' specific content and not just outgroup membership modulates empathic responses and related behavioral consequences including harm.
----------------------
Perceptions of non-target confronters in response to racist and heterosexist remarks
Cheryl Dickter, Julie Kittel & Ivo Gyurovski
European Journal of Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Research has established that targets who express disagreement with prejudicial comments directed toward their social group may be viewed negatively by those they confront or by members of social outgroups. Less research has examined how non-target individuals who confront prejudicial remarks are perceived. The current studies were designed to examine how non-targets who confronted racist (Study 1) and heterosexist (Study 2) comments would be perceived as a function of the level of offensiveness of the comment and the confrontation style used. The studies also examined whether confronting behavior would affect perceptions of the individual who made the prejudicial comment. Undergraduate participants read vignettes depicting a situation with a high or low offensive prejudicial comment in which a non-target individual confronted assertively, unassertively, or not at all. Participants provided judgments of both individuals. Results indicated that non-targets who confronted highly prejudicial comments either assertively or unassertively were liked and respected more than those who failed to confront. Additionally, commenters who were assertively confronted were respected less than commenters who were not. These findings suggest that non-targets may be especially effective in confronting prejudicial comments, as they do not suffer the same negative consequences as targets who confront.
----------------------
Genetics, Personality, and Group Identity
Christopher Weber, Martin Johnson & Kevin Arceneaux
Social Science Quarterly, December 2011, Pages 1314-1337
Objective: Group identity is a central concept in many social science disciplines. We investigate why people identify with groups and show favoritism to in-group members. We anticipate group identifications are substantially influenced by genes and social environments, likely working through stable personality traits.
Methods: Using twin study data from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS I), we investigate the heritability of in-group identification and favoritism, as well as the extent to which the genetic bases of these orientations are shared with genetic underpinnings of personality traits, primarily focusing on the "Big Five": openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability/neuroticism.
Results: Group identification is largely attributable to genetic factors. However, environments also affect group identification. The heritability of personality traits accounts for a modest portion of the genetic variation of group identification.
Conclusion: Our findings have implications for the study of collective action, identity politics, and the growing research program investigating social and political behavior genetics.