Peer pressure against prejudice: A high school field experiment examining social network change

Individuals often conform to the intergroup attitudes and behaviors modeled by their peers in a given situation. To what extent does peer influence on intergroup prejudice 1) diffuse across a social network of peers and 2) affect attitudes and behavior across time? Student leaders (“Peer Trainers”) were trained to confront expressions of intergroup prejudice in five randomly assigned high schools across a period of five months; students recruited to be Peer Trainers in five control schools waited to be trained. Independent surveys of Peer Trainers' social networks reveal that treatment Peer Trainers were significantly more likely than control Trainers to be nominated by peers as students who confront prejudice. Treatment Peer Trainers' tolerant behavior spread to close friends and to acquaintances in their social network; their attitudes spread inconsistently, and only to close friends. Studying peer influence within social networks can improve understanding of social influence, prejudice reduction, and social change.     

Entitativity and prejudice: Examining their relationship and the moderating effect of attitude certainty

Previous research suggests that perceived entitativity, which represents the degree to which groups are perceived to possess unity, coherence, and organization, predicts intergroup stereotyping and bias. The present research yielded complementary evidence that prejudice (toward Muslims in Study 1 and toward South Asians in Study 2) can also predict groups’ perceived entitativity. In particular, Study 1 found that the relationships of two predictors, intergroup contact and social dominance orientation, with perceived entitativity were mediated by prejudice. Study 2 demonstrated, as predicted, that this set of relationships occurred primarily for intergroup attitudes of relatively high certainty. Neither study found support for models in which entitativity mediated the relationships of the predictors with prejudice. Conceptual and analytical factors that may account for evidence of the potential bi-directionality of the bias-entitativity relationship are considered.     

Imagining intergroup contact promotes projection to outgroups

Three studies investigated the conditions under which imagining intergroup contact would lead to greater projection of positive traits to outgroups. In Experiment 1 (Mexico) imagined contact predicted greater self-outgroup positive trait overlap for majority but not minority ethnic groups. In Experiment 2 (UK) imagined contact led to greater projection of positive traits to the outgroup for lower compared to higher identifiers. In Experiment 3 (UK) imagined contact led to greater projection of positive traits to the outgroup when the self was salient compared to when the outgroup was salient. These findings suggest that the social cognitive consequences of imagined contact are most favorable for intergroup relations when the personal self, but not social self, is salient. We discuss the implications of these findings for a developing model of imagined contact effects.     

Social dominance orientation: Cause or ‘mere effect’?: Evidence for SDO as a causal predictor of prejudice and discrimination against ethnic and racial outgroups

The question of whether SDO is a cause or mere effect of intergroup attitudes and behaviors has been the subject of heated debate. Much of the research brought to bear on the question, however, has used cross-sectional data that is not best-suited for making causal inferences. Using data from a panel study that tracked UCLA undergraduates over several years, we find support for the notion that SDO is a cause, rather than ‘mere reflection’ of prejudice and discrimination against outgroups. Specifically, using cross-lagged analyses among White students, we show that SDO measured in 1996 has significant marginal utility for predicting prejudice against a series of ethnic outgroups, as well as self-reported ingroup friendship preference, four years later, controlling for their 1996 levels. Conversely, outgroup affect and ingroup friendship preference measured in 1996 fail to predict SDO levels in 2000 once 1996 SDO levels are taken into account. Implications of these analyses for the debate on the interpretation of SDO as a relatively stable orientation towards group-based hierarchy in society are discussed.     

When is a compliment not a compliment? Evaluating expressions of positive stereotypes

Unlike negative stereotypes, positive stereotypes are often perceived as admirable qualities, and expressions of such beliefs may be intended as compliments toward group members. Two experiments were conducted to examine how the targets of positive stereotypes evaluate others who express such stereotypic “compliments.” In Study 1, Black participants evaluated a White student who praised the athletic ability of African Americans more negatively than a control condition. In Study 2, Black and White participants watched an interracial interaction that involved the White actor expressing positive stereotypes or a control interaction with no stereotypes. In the positive stereotype condition, Black participants evaluated the White actor and the interaction as a whole more negatively than did White participants, but there were no differences in the control condition. The implications for the perpetuation of interracial distrust and avoidance are discussed.     

The unexpectedly positive consequences of confronting sexism

Majority-group members expect to dislike those who confront them for prejudiced behavior. Yet if majority-group members are susceptible to the same social constraints as minority-group members, then their public responses to confrontation should be similarly inhibited. A tempered response to confrontation could smooth a potentially problematic social interaction, thereby producing an outcome that is better than expected. Female confederates confronted men during an interpersonal interaction and then had a second conversation. When interpersonally confronted, men reported equally positive evaluations of a sexist and gender-neutral confronter and confrontational interaction. Additionally, after the sexist confrontation, men's compensatory efforts increased mutual liking and this mutual liking then reduced men's use of sexist language. Thus, social forces also constrain those who are confronted as prejudiced, thereby positively influencing intergroup relations.     

Unprejudiced and self-focused: When intergroup contact is experienced as being about the ingroup rather than the outgroup

Many problematic responses that occur in intergroup interaction, such as inhibited behavior, restricted disclosure of valuable information, and miscommunication, do not arise from negative attitudes and sometimes are more frequently exhibited by lower-prejudice individuals. Thus it is important to consider how lower-prejudice individuals respond to methods for improving intergroup relations that have been investigated with the prejudiced person in mind. Two studies tested the hypothesis that for lower-prejudice individuals intergroup contact is experienced as being about the ingroup rather than the outgroup, and thus fails to exert its usual effect of paving the way for more positive subsequent intergroup exchanges. As predicted, for individuals seeking to be unbiased an initial exchange with one outgroup member affected feelings about ingroup worthiness, but not reactions to a subsequently encountered outgroup member. The opposite pattern was evident for higher-prejudice individuals, who readily generalized from their experience with one outgroup member to the next.     

Intergroup contact buffers against the intergenerational transmission of authoritarianism and racial prejudice

The present study focused on the buffering role of positive intergroup contact in the intergenerational transmission of authoritarianism and racial prejudice in a sample of adolescents and one of their parents. In accordance with our expectations, adolescents’ intergroup contact experiences moderated the mediated relationships between parental authoritarianism and adolescents’ prejudice, both via adolescents’ authoritarianism and via parental prejudice. These relationships were stronger among adolescents with lower, rather than higher, levels of intergroup contact. We conclude that intergroup contact buffers the indirect relationship between parents’ authoritarianism and adolescents’ racial prejudice and therefore constitutes a promising means of reducing the intergenerational transmission of prejudice.     

Predicting policy attitudes from general prejudice versus specific intergroup emotions

How are people’s social policy attitudes related to their affective reactions to the social groups affected by those policies? From a threat-based perspective, specific emotions toward a group—above and beyond general prejudice toward that group—should predict attitudes toward a policy affecting the group. To test this, 128 participants reported their support for four social policies, their general and specific affective reactions to each affected group, and the threats ostensibly posed by that group. Although general prejudice failed to predict each policy attitude after controlling for the specific emotions, specific emotions did indeed significantly predict each policy attitude after controlling for general prejudice. Moreover, these specific emotions tended to mediate predicted relationships between perceived threats and policy attitudes. In all, these results highlight the benefits of assessing specific intergroup emotions as they relate to political arenas.     

Thou shalt not discriminate: How emphasizing moral ideals rather than obligations increases Whites' support for social equality

An important step toward reducing group-based disparities in society is creating support for equality among advantaged group members (e.g., Whites and men). The current research examined how presenting social equality between ethnic groups in terms of moral ideals (i.e., equal treatment) vs. moral obligations (i.e., non-discrimination) affected the attitudes of Whites (students in Study 1, N = 45 and 2, N = 44 and employees in Study 3a, N = 67 and Study 3b, N = 62) toward various social equality issues. It was found that participants in the moral ideals condition reported more activation rather than inhibition tendencies regarding equality (Study 1), were more supportive of affirmative action (Study 2), indicated lower levels of social identity threat, and were more favorable toward cultural diversity which resulted in greater prioritization of equality (Study 3a) than those in the moral obligation condition. These effects did not arise when the ideals/obligations distinction was applied to a nonmoral domain (i.e., competence, Study 3b), underlining the central argument that these processes are specific to morality. The broader theoretical implications for morality and intergroup research are discussed.     

Changing categorization of self can change emotions about outgroups

Drawing on Intergroup Emotions Theory [Mackie, D. M., Maitner, A. T., & Smith, E. R. (in press). Intergroup emotions theory. In T.D. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination, New York: Erlbaum.], we propose that a perceiver’s emotional reactions toward other social groups can change in response to situationally induced shifts in self-categorization. American students were led to self-categorize as Americans or as students and reported their anger and respect towards Muslims and police. Results indicated that in reaction to Muslims, participants felt more anger and less respect when categorized as Americans than when categorized as students. In reaction to police, participants felt less anger and more respect when categorized as Americans than when categorized as students. These results support and extend IET, and suggest that in addition to prejudice reduction interventions that focus on recategorization of the target, perceiver recategorization of the self is a viable means of changing emotional reactions to social targets.     

Représentations sociales de la personne obèse et de l’obésité : effets de la situation de contact

This paper introduces a study about social representations of obese people and obesity. Two hundred normal-weighted women divided in two groups (presence vs absence of contact with an obese person) completed a word association tasks with inductive words “obese people” and “obesity”. Two instructions were proposed: one in which they responded for themselves (standard instruction) and another in which they responded for someone else (substitution instruction). Results of the Correspondences Factor Analysis support the hypothesis of an intergroup contact effect on the explored social representations’ organization. Participants in contact with obese people seem to have a more empathetic representation than those who have no contact. Indeed, when participants did not respond for themselves, counter-normative representations were produced: stereotypical elements and a judgment on the physical characteristics were expressed. These results were discussed regarding theories of intergroup contact and of social representations.     

Threatened selves and differential prejudice expression by White and Black perceivers

Previous theorizing suggests that often-stigmatized individuals may be just as likely, if not more likely, than infrequently stigmatized individuals to protect self-regard by derogating members of low-status groups after receiving negative feedback from high-status others. Often-stigmatized individuals, however, can discount criticism from these high-status others as reflecting prejudice, thereby making outgroup derogation unnecessary as an esteem-protective strategy. Replicating past research, White participants in Experiment 1 expressed prejudices after receiving negative feedback from a White evaluator; as predicted, however, Black participants did not. In Experiment 2, participants instead received negative feedback from Black evaluators (evaluators more likely to threaten Black participants’ self-regard). Here, contrary to previous theorizing, Black participants expressed prejudices, not toward another low-status group, but toward high-status Whites. In all, findings reveal flaws in previous assumptions that frequently stigmatized individuals may be especially prone to devalue lower-status others after rejection or negative feedback from members of higher-status groups.     

Trait ratings of the in-group and out-group with minimal acquaintance: Differentiation and out-group favorability

Malloy et al. (2011) studied trait judgments and behavior of Black and White men during face-to-face interactions at zero-acquaintance and found that intergroup responses were asymmetric. The present research extends that work. In Study 1 Black and White men observed two dyadic interactions from the Malloy et al (2011) study and rated in-group targets’ traits. In Study 2, using the type generation paradigm, Black and White males and females generated types of persons from their racial in-group or out-group and rated their traits. Blacks differentiated the unique traits of Whites to a greater extent than Whites differentiated the unique traits of Blacks. Blacks and Whites judged out-group targets’ traits more positively than those of in-group members, and both differentiated the unique traits of in-group members more than out-group members.