Self-protection and growth as the motivational force behind majority group members' cultural adaptation and discrimination: A parallel mediation model via intergroup contact and threat

What motivates majority group members to adapt to or reject cultural diversity? Considering the relevance of personal values on our attitudes and behaviours, we inspected how self-protection and growth predict levels of discriminatory behavioural and cultural adaptation intentions towards migrants via intergroup contact and perceived intergroup threats, simultaneously (i.e., parallel mediation). Specifically, positive contact between groups is known for reducing prejudice through diminishing perceived intergroup threats. Yet current research emphasises the role of individual differences in this interplay while proposing a parallel relationship between perceived intergroup threats and contact. Also by inspecting cultural adaptation and discriminatory behavioural intentions, the present study examined more proximal indicators of real-world intergroup behaviours than explored in past research. Using data from 304 US Americans, structural equation modelling indicated a good fit for a parallel mediation model with growth relating positively to cultural adaptation intentions and negatively to discriminatory behavioural intentions through being positively associated with intergroup contact and negatively with perceived intergroup threats, simultaneously. The reverse was found for self-protection. These findings stress that personal values constitute a relevant individual difference in the contact/threats-outcome relationship, providing a motivational explanation for majority group members' experience of cultural diversity in their own country.     

Christ,Country, and Conspiracies? Christian Nationalism,Biblical Literalism,and Belief in Conspiracy Theories

When misinformation is rampant, “fake news” is rising, and conspiracy theories are widespread, social scientists have a vested interest in understanding who is most susceptible to these false narratives and why. Recent research suggests Christians are especially susceptible to belief in conspiracy theories in the United States, but scholars have yet to ascertain the role of religiopolitical identities and epistomological approaches, specifically Christian nationalism and biblical literalism, in generalized conspiracy thinking. Because Christian nationalists sense that the nation is under cultural threat and biblical literalism provides an alternative (often anti-elite) source of information, we predict that both will amplify conspiracy thinking. We find that Christian nationalism and biblical literalism independently predict conspiracy thinking, but that the effect of Christian nationalism increases with literalism. Our results point to the contingent effects of Christian nationalism and the need for the religious variables in understanding conspiracy thinking.     

Analysis of Religious Bias among Christian Students in Science

Christians are notably underrepresented in science in part due to long-standing public perceptions of science-religion incompatibility and antireligious bias in science. This research explores whether undergraduates at a Christian university perceive and impose anti-Christian cultural stigma in science. Survey results from 126 biology students revealed that though students generally perceived the culture of science to be anti-Christian, they perceived Christians to have equal opportunities for scientific achievement. Results from a quasi-experimental audit study, in which students evaluated one of two profiles for mock prospective Ph.D. applicants (Christian or undisclosed faith) showed that students did not project anti-Christian stereotypes in terms of competence, hireability, or likeability, but showed some evidence of pro-Christian favorability. Together, this study suggests that the affirmational community of a Christian University may alleviate some negative impacts of anti-Christian stereotypes in academic biology, even as students perceive discrimination against Christians in science and atheists as more scientifically competent.     

Behavioral extremity moderates the association between certainty in attitudes about COVID and willingness to engage in mitigation-related behaviors

People generally intend to act more on beliefs and attitudes about which they have greater certainty. However, we introduce a boundary condition to the positive association between certainty and behavioral intentions—behavioral extremity. Uncertainty about a threatening issue like COVID-19 can be disconcerting, and we propose that uncertain people cope in part through increased openness to extreme actions like accepting risky medical treatments and aggression toward those defying mitigation policies. Testing this, we compiled and analyzed all the data on certainty about COVID-19 mitigation policies and willingness to engage in mitigation-related behaviors that our lab collected during the pandemic (6 samples, 20 behaviors, Ns up to 1496). External ratings of the behaviors' extremity moderated certainty-willingness associations: whereas greater certainty was associated with increased willingness to engage in moderate behaviors (the typical result), lower certainty was associated with increased willingness to engage in extreme behaviors, especially among those worried about becoming ill.     

Defensive Partisanship? Evidence that In-Party Scandals Increase Out-Party Hostility

Contemporary U.S. politics is characterized by polarization and interpartisan antipathy. This is accompanied by a media landscape saturated with coverage of political scandals. Applying a social identity perspective, we examined whether exposure to scandals that threaten partisan's moral group image (i.e., in-party scandals), may motivate defensive hostility against opposing partisans. Across three experiments we exposed U.S. partisans to scandals attributed to either in-party or out-party politicians. We then assessed partisan hostility using a variety of operationalizations, including anger at a real outgroup politician (Study 1), judgments about the alleged misdeeds of a fabricated outgroup politician (Study 2), and negative perceptions of opposing party members (Study 3). Strength of partisan identity was assessed as a predicted moderator (Study 3). As expected in- (vs. out-) party scandals, were perceived as group-image threats and elicited greater hostility towards opposing partisans, independent of partisans' ideological extremity or prior affective polarization.     

Human social defeat and approach–avoidance: Escalating social-evaluative threat and threat of aggression increases social avoidance

Basic research on avoidance by Murray Sidman laid the foundation for advances in the classification, conceptualization and treatment of avoidance in psychological disorders. Contemporary avoidance research is explicitly translational and increasingly focused on how competing appetitive and aversive contingencies influence avoidance. In this laboratory investigation, we examined the effects of escalating social-evaluative threat and threat of social aggression on avoidance of social interactions. During social-defeat learning, 38 adults learned to associate 9 virtual peers with an increasing probability of receiving negative evaluations. Additionally, 1 virtual peer was associated with positive evaluations. Next, in an approach–avoidance task with social-evaluative threat, 1 peer associated with negative evaluations was presented alongside the peer associated with positive evaluations. Approaching peers produced a positive or a probabilistic negative evaluation, while avoiding peers prevented a negative evaluation (and forfeited a positive evaluation). In an approach–avoidance task with social aggression, virtual peers gave and took money away from participants. Escalating social-evaluative threat and aggression increased avoidance, ratings of feeling threatened and threat expectancy and decreased ratings of peer favorableness. These findings underscore the potential of coupling social defeat and approach–avoidance paradigms for translational research on the neurobehavioral mechanisms of social approach–avoidance decision-making and anxiety.     

The legacies of systemic and internalized oppression: Experiences of microaggressions,imposter phenomenon,and stereotype threat on historically marginalized groups

Previous literature has described how people of historically marginalized groups (namely people of color, women, queer and transgender people, people living with disabilities, immigrants, and people of religious minority groups) are likely to internalize negative, oppressive feelings about their identities (David, 2014; David, Schroeder, & Femandez, 2019). For example, studies have found that many women and people of color (and women of color, in particular) experience what has been labeled as imposter phenomenon, or the notion that they are not intelligent or adequate enough, despite evidence that confirms their success or worth. Similarly, people of color and people from other historically marginalized groups are known to experience stereotype threat, or anxiety about performance or behaviors that could confirm biases about a social group they belong to. Finally, previous literature shows that people of historically marginalized groups navigate various types of microaggressions, or subtle or covert biased statements and behaviors that negatively impact their self-esteem, academic performance, mental health, and physical health. While the terms microaggressions, stereotype threat, and imposter phenomenon have been discussed thoroughly in academic literature, less is written about the connections between these concepts. Utilizing intersectionality theory, the current paper will propose an interactional model between these constructs and aims to describe how cumulative effects of microaggressions exacerbate and contribute to internalized oppression. Based on this model, this paper will also provide recommendations for future directions in psychological research and practice.     

Threat to Ethnic Identity: The Experience of White Afrikaans-Speaking Participants in Postapartheid South Africa

Abstract

The dismantling of apartheid and the postapartheid dispensation had far-reaching implications for all the citizens of South Africa. In an urban sample of White Afrikaans-speaking South Africans (Afrikaners) in postapartheid South Africa, the authors investigated perceptions of threat to ethnic identity, as well as correlates of those perceptions. The respondents experienced threat on 2 levels: The 1st was distinctive continuity, the concern that their ethnic group would not continue as a distinctive group in society. The 2nd was the evaluative dimension of ethnic identity (i.e., well-being), the concern that group membership would no longer contribute to positive self-esteem. The respondents experienced greater threat on the 2nd level, reflecting predominantly negative experiences as White Afrikaans-speaking persons in postapartheid South Africa. A high threat perception on the 2nd level was associated with (a) a perception of other groups' negative evaluations of their ethnic group, (b) negative attitudes toward political changes, and (c) perceptions of illegitimacy and instability of the postapartheid political system. The respondents who felt that Afrikaners would not continue as a distinctive group in society had a more positive attitude toward the sociopolitical changes, did not show strong ethnic identification, and had a negative collective self-esteem. They were also politically more liberal. Those findings are discussed in relation to theoretical expectations.