Their kind
The Effect of Segregation on Intergroup Relations
Ryan Enos & Christopher Celaya
Journal of Experimental Political Science, Spring 2018, Pages 26-38
Abstract:
Inter-ethnic residential segregation is correlated with intergroup bias and conflict, poorly functioning states and civil societies, weak economic development, and ethnocentric political behavior. As such, segregation has been a subject of long-standing interest. However, segregation has not been assigned in randomized controlled trials, so the observed correlations may be spurious and the mechanism behind these correlations is poorly understood. In two experiments, we randomly assign segregation in a laboratory and demonstrate that segregation affects perceptions of other people and causes intergroup bias in costly decision-making. Rather than segregation merely inhibiting intergroup contact, we demonstrate that segregation directly affects perception and thus can affect intergroup relations even when holding contact constant.
Racial Population Projections and Reactions to Alternative News Accounts of Growing Diversity
Dowell Myers & Morris Levy
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, May 2018, Pages 215-228
Abstract:
Projections of changes in racial demographics depend on how race is classified. The U.S. Census Bureau makes several different projections of the nation’s racial demographic future, but the most publicized version projects our racial future in a way that narrows the definition of race groups to exclude people who are of mixed race or Hispanic. This definition results in projections of many fewer “whites,” accelerating the impending decline of the country’s white majority and perhaps heightening white audiences’ anxiety about demographic change. We conducted an experiment that randomly assigned whites to read alternative news stories based on 2014 Census Bureau projections. One story emphasized growing diversity, a second emphasized the decline of the white population to minority status, and a third described an enduring white majority based on intermarriage and inclusive white identity. Much higher levels of anxiety or anger, especially among Republicans, were recorded after reading the white minority story than the alternative stories of diversity or an enduring white majority.
Genetic Attributions: Sign of Intolerance or Acceptance?
Stephen Schneider, Kevin Smith & John Hibbing
Journal of Politics, forthcoming
Abstract:
Many scholars argue that people who attribute human characteristics to genetic causes also tend to hold politically and socially problematic attitudes. More specifically, public acceptance of genetic influences is believed to be associated with intolerance, prejudice, and the legitimation of social inequities and laissez-faire policies. We test these expectations with original data from two nationally representative samples that allow us to identify the American public’s attributional patterns across 18 diverse traits. Key findings are (1) genetic attributions are actually more likely to be made by liberals, not conservatives; (2) genetic attributions are associated with higher, not lower, levels of tolerance of vulnerable individuals; and (3) genetic attributions do not correlate with unseemly racial attitudes.
Resolving racial ambiguity in social interactions
Sarah Gaither, Laura Babbitt & Samuel Sommers
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, May 2018, Pages 259-269
Abstract:
People take longer to categorize racially ambiguous individuals, but does this perceptual complexity also affect social interactions? In Study 1, White participants interacted with a racially ambiguous confederate who was either labeled as biracial Black/White, monoracial Black, or given no racial label. White participants in the biracial condition were significantly less cognitively depleted, less essentialist in their thoughts about race, and exhibited more accurate face memory for their partners than when partner race remained unspecified or was labeled as monoracial Black. Confederate reports and nonverbal behavior in the biracial condition were also more positive. In Study 2, White participants perceived more similarity with a biracial Black/White labeled interaction partner compared to a Black-specified or race-unspecified partner, highlighting for the first time how racial ambiguity and racial labeling affect behavioral outcomes in social interactions.
Women as Animals, Women as Objects: Evidence for Two Forms of Objectification
Kasey Lynn Morris, Jamie Goldenberg & Patrick Boyd
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Women are objectified through overt sexualization and through a focus on physical appearance, but empirical research has not yet made this distinction. In three studies, we found evidence consistent with the hypothesis that although both forms of objectification strip women of their humanness, there are unique dehumanizing signatures associated with each. When women were objectified by a focus on their sexual features or functions (sexual objectification), they were perceived as lacking uniquely human attributes (i.e., animalistic dehumanization). Conversely, when women were objectified by an emphasis on their beauty or physical appearance (appearance-focused objectification), they were perceived as lacking human nature (i.e., mechanistic dehumanization). In Study 3, we also examined an outcome associated with women’s risk of harm and found that mechanistic dehumanization, in response to appearance-focused objectification, uniquely promoted the perception that a woman was less capable of feeling pain. Implications for objectification research are discussed.
The Illusion of Political Tolerance: Social Desirability and Self-Reported Voting Preferences
Jazmin Brown-Iannuzzi, Maxine Najle & Will Gervais
Social Psychological and Personality Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Tolerance for diversity in America is often indexed by direct measures, such as self-reported “willingness to vote” polls. However, pressures to be or appear unprejudiced may bias such estimates, yielding misleading and overly optimistic inferences about tolerance in America. The current research investigated the degree to which direct and indirect measures of political candidate preferences converge and diverge across six target groups varying in acceptability of stigmatization (atheists, African Americans, Catholics, gay men and lesbians, Muslims, and women) and across relevant participant demographics. Overall, participants (N = 3,000, nationally representative) reported less willingness to vote for target groups when measured indirectly, relative to directly. Additionally, the divergence between the direct and indirect measures was especially evident for social groups for which overt stigmatization is normatively inappropriate. This research provides a vital benchmark that quantifies the gulf between the direct and indirect measures of tolerance for various oft-stigmatized groups in America.
A cross‐cultural investigation of children’s implicit attitudes toward White and Black racial outgroups
Jennifer Steele et al.
Developmental Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Initial theory and research examining children’s implicit racial attitudes suggest that an implicit preference favoring socially advantaged groups emerges early in childhood and remains stable across development (Dunham, Baron, & Banaji, 2008). In two studies, we examined the ubiquity of this theory by measuring non‐Black minority and non‐White majority children’s implicit racial attitudes toward White and Black racial outgroups in two distinct cultural contexts. In Study 1, non‐Black minority children in an urban North American community with a large Black population showed an implicit pro‐White (versus Black) bias in early childhood. Contrary to previous findings, the magnitude of this bias was lower among older children. In Study 2, Malay (majority) and Chinese (minority) children and adults in the Southeast Asian country of Brunei, with limited contact with White or Black peers, showed an implicit pro‐White (versus Black) bias in early childhood. However, the magnitude of bias was greater for adults. Together, these findings support initial theorizing about the early development of implicit intergroup cognition, but suggest that context may affect these biases across development to a greater extent than was previously thought.
A comparison of clinicians' racial biases in the United States and France
Natalia Khosla et al.
Social Science & Medicine, June 2018, Pages 31-37
Method: American (N = 83) and French (N = 81) clinicians were randomly assigned to report their impressions of an identical Black or White male patient based on a physician's notes. We measured clinicians' views of the patient's anticipated improvement and adherence to treatment and their perceptions concerning how personally responsible the patient was for his health.
Results: Whereas French clinicians did not exhibit significant racial bias on the measures of interest, American clinicians rated a hypothetical White patient, compared to an identical Black patient, as significantly more likely to improve, adhere to treatment, and be personally responsible for his health. Moreover, in the U.S., personal responsibility mediated the racial difference in expected improvement, such that as the White patient was seen as more personally responsible for his health, he was also viewed as more likely to improve.
Born that way or became that way: Stigma toward congenital versus acquired disability
Kathleen Bogart, Nicole Rosa & Michael Slepian
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, forthcoming
Abstract:
Stigma may differ depending on the timing of group-membership entry, whether a person was “born that way” or “became that way.” Disability, a highly understudied minority group, varies on this domain. Three studies demonstrated that congenital disability is more stigmatized than acquired disability and essentialism and blame moderate and mediate this effect. Congenital disability was more stigmatized than the acquired version of the same disability (Studies 1–2). People with congenital disability were more essentialized, but less blamed than people with acquired disability (Study 2). Manipulating onset and essentialism revealed that when disability was acquired, low essentialism predicted greater stigma through blame (Study 3). However, when disability was congenital, essentialism did not affect stigma through blame. For stigmatized groups unlikely to be blamed for their group membership, reducing essentialism could ameliorate stigma, but for groups that might be blamed for their group membership, increasing essentialism may be a tool to reduce stigma by reducing blame.
Construing the Essence: The Effects of Construal Level on Genetic Attributions for Individual and Social Group Differences
Jaime Napier et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
The present research links a nonsocial, contextual influence (construal level) to the tendency to endorse genetic attributions for individual and social group differences. Studies 1 to 3 show that people thinking in an abstract (vs. concrete) mind-set score higher on a measure of genetic attributions for individual and racial group differences. Study 4 showed that abstract (vs. concrete) construal also increased genetic attributions for novel groups. Study 5 explored the potential downstream consequences of construal on intergroup attitudes, and found that abstract (vs. concrete) construal led people to endorse genetic attributions in general and this was associated with increased anti-Black prejudice.
Geographic Variation in the Black-Violence Stereotype
David Johnson & William Chopik
Social Psychological and Personality Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
The stereotype that Blacks are violent is pervasive in the United States. Yet little research has examined whether this stereotype is linked to violent behavior from members of different racial groups. We examined how state-level violent crime rates among White and Black Americans predicted the strength of the Black-violence stereotype using a sample of 348,111 individuals from the Project Implicit website. State-level implicit and explicit stereotypes were predicted by crime rates. States where Black people committed higher rates of violent crime showed a stronger Black-violence stereotype, whereas states where White people committed higher rates of violent crime showed a weaker Black-violence stereotype. These patterns were stronger for explicit stereotypes than implicit stereotypes. We discuss the implications of these findings for the development and maintenance of stereotypes.
When contact goes wrong: Negative intergroup contact promotes generalized outgroup avoidance
Rose Meleady & Laura Forder
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper broadens our understanding of the consequences of negative intergroup contact. Study 1 reports cross-sectional evidence that negative contact with European immigrants in Britain is not only associated with increased prejudice, but also the avoidance of future contact with this group. Studies 2A and 2B provided an experimental replication in a different intergroup context. A negative encounter with an outgroup member, but not an ingroup member, was found to reduce intentions to engage in contact with the outgroup in the future. Study 3 went on to demonstrate that the effect of negative contact on outgroup avoidance is not limited to the contacted outgroup, but is indirectly associated with reduced intentions to engage with other, secondary outgroups — an effect we refer to as avoidance generalization effect. Negative contact was also associated with lower general contact self-efficacy. Together, findings suggest that negative contact is damaging not just because it increases prejudice but also because it compromises future engagement with diversity.
Leveraging the Social Role of Dad to Change Gender Stereotypes of Men
Bernadette Park & Sarah Banchefsky
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Trait stereotypes of men tend to be more fixed and negative than those of women. The current studies test whether stereotypes of men can be shifted through leveraging their social role as fathers. Trait attributes perceived to characterize women and moms were highly redundant, but those of men and dads were less so; moreover, men were perceived more negatively than dads, women, and moms (Study 1). Perceivers for whom the social role father was made salient rated men more similarly to dads, and no less similarly to men, and rated men more positively relative to a control condition (Study 2). Finally, among men, a threat to the category men resulted in greater opposition to benevolent social policies, but not if the social role father was primed (Study 3). Discussion focuses on positive consequences of increasing the psychological connection between men and fatherhood.
Social contagion of ethnic hostility
Michal Bauer et al.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 8 May 2018, Pages 4881-4886
Abstract:
Interethnic conflicts often escalate rapidly. Why does the behavior of masses easily change from cooperation to aggression? This paper provides an experimental test of whether ethnic hostility is contagious. Using incentivized tasks, we measured willingness to sacrifice one’s own resources to harm others among adolescents from a region with a history of animosities toward the Roma people, the largest ethnic minority in Europe. To identify the influence of peers, subjects made choices after observing either destructive or peaceful behavior of peers in the same task. We found that susceptibility to follow destructive behavior more than doubled when harm was targeted against Roma rather than against coethnics. When peers were peaceful, subjects did not discriminate. We observed very similar patterns in a norms-elicitation experiment: destructive behavior toward Roma was not generally rated as more socially appropriate than when directed at coethnics, but the ratings were more sensitive to social contexts. The findings may illuminate why ethnic hostilities can spread quickly, even in societies with few visible signs of interethnic hatred.
A group is more than the average of its parts: Why existing stereotypes are applied more to the same individuals when viewed in groups than when viewed alone
Erin Cooley & Keith Payne
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, forthcoming
Abstract:
Categorizing people into groups is fundamental to stereotype formation. Thus, across four studies, we hypothesize that perceiving people in the context of groups (vs. alone) will amplify the application of existing stereotypes. Consistent with hypotheses, our first two studies demonstrate that Black people in groups (vs. the same Black people viewed alone) are perceived as more representative of Black people in general (Study 1), and more representative of negative stereotypes of Black people (Study 2). Similarly, Study 3 finds that positive stereotypes of Asian people (i.e., “hard-working” and “good at math”) are perceived as more representative of Asian people in groups than those same Asian people viewed alone. Finally, Study 4 demonstrates that increased stereotyping of groups is driven by attributes associated with groups (i.e., proximity) rather than the number of exemplars. We conclude that groups are not only integral to the formation of stereotypes, but also to their application.
The Mixed Outcomes of Taking Ownership for Implicit Racial Biases
Erin Cooley, Ryan Lei & Taylor Ellerkamp
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
One potential strategy for prejudice reduction is encouraging people to acknowledge, and take ownership for, their implicit biases. Across two studies, we explore how taking ownership for implicit racial bias affects the subsequent expression of overt bias. Participants first completed an implicit measure of their attitudes toward Black people. Then we either led participants to think of their implicit bias as their own or as stemming from external factors. Results revealed that taking ownership for high implicit racial bias had diverging effects on subsequent warmth toward Black people (Study 1) and donations to a Black nonprofit (Study 2) based on people’s internal motivations to respond without prejudice (Internal Motivation Scale [IMS]). Critically, among those low in IMS, owning high implicit bias backfired, leading to greater overt prejudice and smaller donations. We conclude that taking ownership of implicit bias has mixed outcomes—at times amplifying the expression of explicit prejudice.
Imagined contact with atypical outgroup members that are anti-normative within their group can reduce prejudice
Orkun Yetkili et al.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, May 2018, Pages 208-219
Abstract:
Can imagining contact with anti-normative outgroup members be an effective tool for improving intergroup relations? Extant theories predict greatest prejudice reduction following contact with typical outgroup members. In contrast, using subjective group dynamics theory, we predicted that imagining contact with anti-normative outgroup members can promote positive intergroup attitudes because these atypical members potentially reduce intergroup threat and reinforce ingroup norms. In Study 1 (N = 79) when contact was imagined with an anti-normative rather than a normative outgroup member, that member was viewed as less typical and the contact was less threatening. Studies 2 (N = 47) and 3 (N = 180), employed differing methods, measures and target groups, and controlled for the effects of direct contact. Both studies showed that imagined contact with anti-normative outgroup members promoted positive attitudes to the outgroup, relative both to a no contact control condition and (in Study 3) to a condition involving imagined contact with an ingroup antinormative member. Overall, this research offers new practical and theoretical approaches to prejudice reduction.
Socioeconomic status is not judged equally: Target race shifts standards in interpersonal judgments of SES
Matthew Weeks
European Journal of Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Across 3 studies, respondents made SES judgments of targets varying in Race (White or Black) and SES (Low or High), including global subjective SES, financial success, and educational attainment. As Whites and Blacks are stereotypically associated with upper and lower SES, respectively, the Shifting Standards Model (SSM) of stereotype judgments predicted the pattern of interpersonal objective and subjective judgments. In Study 1, in a between‐subjects design, respondents rated Black targets significantly higher on subjective measures than White targets, even as the targets were rated as comparable on objective measures. Study 2 replicated these effects with a broader range of stimulus materials. In Study 3, the shifting standards effect was replicated using a within‐subjects design, further supporting the effect. The findings support the application of the SSM to race‐based shifts in interpersonal judgments of SES and are discussed regarding their implications for intergroup relations and workplace evaluations.
The financial cost of status signaling: Expansive postural displays are associated with a reduction in the receipt of altruistic donations
Jessica Tracy et al.
Evolution and Human Behavior, forthcoming
Abstract:
Models of human altruism suggest that decisions to help are influenced by assessments of both potential recipients' need state and their competence, as high need increases the value of gifts received, and competent recipients can most effectively use and repay gifts. Need and competence are often inversely related, however, raising the question of how altruists weigh these competing sources of information. We examined the impact of a nonverbal display (expansive posture) that, by signaling high status, simultaneously cues both low need and high competence, on actual altruistic behaviors: donations of financial aid to needy individuals. Across three studies using ecologically valid data drawn from a micro-lending charity website, men who displayed expansive posture while requesting aid faced a substantial reduction in the amount of aid they received; this effect held controlling for a range of relevant covariates. These findings demonstrate that: (a) altruists bias their giving toward those in greater need rather those who may be more competent, and (b) subtle nonverbal cues of status influence altruistic decision-making.